In 2004, while President George W. Bush was running for re-election, he developed a sinister reputation for aggressively banishing political dissent from his events. Bush “rewrote the playbook for organizing campaign rallies,” USA Today declared, ejecting from them people who scrawled anti-war messages on signs and shirts. The ACLU sued and successfully settled with the federal government over one couple’s thwarted attempts to wear anti-Bush t-shirts to a 2004 rally. One political science professor even compared Bush to Richard Nixon over the suppressive behavior at these events.
Fast forward to 2015, this past Saturday, when Bernie Sanders, an increasingly viable contender for the Democratic presidential nomination, held one of his biggest campaign rallies to date, drawing more than 20,000 people to an event at the Boston convention center. Among those visitors were a number of young activists from Boston Students for Justice in Palestine, who were curious about Sanders’ position on the occupied territories. They had a sign with them; in a playful nod to one of Sanders’ campaign slogans, it simply asked, “Will Ya Feel The Bern For Palestine?” The activists say they were well-received by other Sanders supporters in the crowd.
But staffers working for a candidate widely viewed as one of the most progressive members of the Senate were apparently not happy. Security was made aware of a threat: Some students who support Sanders were holding a sign with a question on it. A tactic right out of the Bush campaign “playbook” went into action.
“They told us to either put the sign away or leave,” said Sana Hashmani, one of the student activists. “We asked why, and they said that Bernie’s campaign staff had said the sign had to go.”
There had been no signs of trouble previously. The pro-Palestine group was doing nothing unusual — except, perhaps, for daring to question Sanders about territories occupied by Israel, of which Sanders has been a not-entirely-progressive supporter. “When we got there and entered the overflow space with our sign, people were supporting us and taking pictures, and other people had signs talking about various social issues as well,” Hashmani said.
In a brief cell phone video of the incident, security staff can be seen threatening to arrest the students if they didn’t leave the premises.
Two days after the students were ejected, a day after the group posted about the encounter on Facebook, a Sanders 2016 spokesperson acknowledged a campaign staffer was behind the ejection and that an error had been made. “What happened was a poor decision by a low-level staffer and doesn’t reflect campaign policy,” the spokesperson said.
To a certain extent, the episode reflects an underlying tension between Sanders’ base of young progressives and his comparatively friendly posture toward Israel. A 2014 Pew Research Center poll found minority and millennial Democrats markedly more critical of Israeli military actions. At a town hall event last August, Sanders lost his temper with supporters who had interrupted him to question him about U.S. support for Israel, telling them to “shut up,” and attempting to change the subject to ISIS. During Israel’s 2014 military campaign against the Gaza Strip a plurality of Democrats described the action as “unjustified,” while Sanders was part of the unanimous Senate consent supporting Israel’s actions. He has continued to defend the “Protective Edge” operation as a legitimate act of self-defense, albeit one in which Israel “overreacted.”
Even Sanders’ support for a two-state solution to the Israel/Palestine conflict, which he progressively advocated before it became mainstream U.S. orthodoxy, now seems out of touch; a 2014 Brookings Institute poll found a majority of Americans favored a more radical one-state solution to the conflict, were a two-state solution to become unfeasible.
But the ejection of pro-Palestine students from the Sanders rally surfaced a bigger question with a potentially more disturbing answer: Can this candidate, beloved by the left wing, learn to cope more tolerantly with protest and dissent?
Already, Sanders has been criticized for his handling of Black Lives Matter protesters at his events. Boston Students for Justice in Palestine are also worried about a tendency to marginalize, rather than engage, critics.
“What concerns us most,” read a post about the incident on the group’s Facebook page, “about being unwelcome in this political space on the basis of a sign is not what is says about Bernie’s stance on Palestine, but rather, his team’s refusal to entertain diverse viewpoints. Is this how Bernie is going to answer those, supporters and non-supporters alike, who ask challenging questions about his views? Just silencing them?”
In recent months, Sanders has been transformed from an obscure candidate into a potent challenger to Hillary Clinton. This effort has come in large part due to a committed progressive base, who contribute not just by attending Sanders rallies but financially, with small individual donations that have become a tidal wave, helping the candidate stay competitive. For this young base, the suggestion that his campaign is unreceptive to their views, perhaps even willing to silence them, is particularly dispiriting.
“The way they reacted to us trying to bring up this issue was very aggressive,” said Jose Godoy, one of the students ejected from the event. “They singled us out, and didn’t seem to want this issue to be brought up at all.”
That view was echoed by Ibrahim Sumaira, who said, “We look up to Bernie Sanders on a lot of issues, but we don’t want the same thing to happen where we believed that Barack Obama would meaningfully change foreign policy and nothing of that sort ended up occurring.”
Update: Added comment from the Sanders campaign, responding to a prior request from The Intercept. Oct 5 11:50 pm.
Correction: A previous version of the story identified the “shut up” incident as taking place in August 2015, whereas it should have indicated August 2014.
Update: Sanders campaign manager Jeff Weaver has indicated the staffer responsible for the ejections has been removed from their position, and reiterated the decision to remove the students does not reflect campaign policy.
Bernie is jewish, and he knows the establishment(and is part of it)and is probably just playing the democracy game so the American sheep can think they’re still free. jesse ventura said it well when he said the press appearances are like staged wrestling.
“Sanders campaign manager Jeff Weaver has indicated the staffer responsible for the ejections has been removed from their position, and reiterated the decision to remove the students does not reflect campaign policy.”
That’s all good and well. And pray tell Mr. Weaver what exactly IS Mr. Sanders policy regarding Palestine and the rights of the Palestinian people? One state? Two states? No state? Does Mr. Sanders have the courage to state and stand behind his position on this important issue that affects all Americans? It’s a simple question. Please provide a simple answer.
All part of the plan to DEM edge Sanders out; and BushCObamanable BILLARY Back in!
This is a blatant hit piece on Sanders, outright stating, in the headline and the text, that low level, former employee’s, thoughts and actions, represent Senator Sanders’ thoughts and actions.
A new rag already trashing its own credibility.
So what else is new? Even Elizabeth Warren had to parrot the identical position. Did I miss the article critiquing her for it?
Hah! There was one on her at the time.
I read this article with interest, but when I got to the corrections at the end, it seemed actually fairly egregious that they are not at the front, with either a rewrite of the whole article, or a couple paragraphs up front reframing it. Unless the author believes the Sanders campaign is insincere, the fact that they opposed this action and disciplined the staffer means that this whole event is about one or two over-zealous staffers, not about Sanders. I support holding candidates’ feet to the fire, but you have to be honest about it. Putting significant corrections at the end with only a minor tweak to the article is not being honest.
Yes, I agree. I think this is one of those catnip articles with the “hook” headline. I personally think Bernie should be given as much latitude as possible on this subject. He seems like a decent man.
Although there are so many people who are “decent” except when it comes to the subject of Israel/Palestine. So who knows, maybe I’m wrong and maybe this is the kind of pressure required.
I don’t know. But I do love Bernie.
HOLY SHIT WHY ARE THE JEWS WARNING US ABOUT ELITE JEWS.
Robert Downey Jr. (a Jew himself) BEGS THE JEW’S TO FORGIVE MEL GIBSON!!!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rvfM3EW2DG8watch?v=rvfM3EW2DG8
Seth MacFarlane (a Jew himself) is taking heat over his Jews-control-Hollywood @ the Oscars…
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Qp92q38OKEQwatch?v=Qp92q38OKEQ
HOLY SHIT WHY IS THE GODFATHER (MARLON BRANDO) WARNING US ABOUT THE ELITE JEWS
The Godfather (Marlon Brando) is VERY GOD DAMN ANGRY at Jews in Hollywood
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bv4UOwAWhpU
Kind of misleading that the statement by the Sanders campaign clarifying that this incident was due to unauthorized action by a low-level staffer who has since been dismissed is not right up front here.
LOL. Gotta laugh at this worthless, disgusting, idiotic BDS activist riff-raff and their “journalistic” fellow-travelers.
Keep up the fight comrades, your Palestine “from the river to the sea” is just around the corner.
*chuckle*
CHUCKLE…im laughing at a worthless, disgusting, idiotic IDF riff-raff that only exists cuz of our US tax dollars. get yourself a real country and not a welfare state madeinusa…CHUCKLE…u Zionists are a riot..CHUCKLE…the Nazis of the Middle East…CHUCKLE…VIVA PALESTINE!!!
Louise, Louise, Louise… you’re not chuckling buddy. Nobody’s buying it. Give up the act.
You’re wrong, as always, dear.
Nothing is as chuckle-worthy as the decades-long deranged delusions of “Palestinians” and their moronic Western enablers, and their insane hope that – if they only try the failed strategy of attacking Israel, losing the war that they started, and then begging West for charity like the filthy pathetic losers that they are once more – *this* will be the time Israel gets eradicated.
You’re such an extremist Louise. I don’t hear anybody talking about “eradicating” anybody, other than Israeli soldiers trying to eradicate teenage palestinian boys.
And yes, do give up the act. you sound like you’re about to have a heart attack. I can hear you screaming through your quotation marks, and I can feel your face forming permanent scream lines as you write.
You better check yourself darling.
And everybody already knows the situation. everybdy knows who the charity recipient is, and how they get their charity. You ain’t foolin nobody nomore. Those days are over. The internet is here :)
Have a good scream. Shatter a glass.
“Israeli soldiers trying to eradicate teenage palestinian boys.”
Aww.
You sound like a sweet German in the 1940s
Palestine is a terrorist-run organization, and terrorism cannot be supported by our government or our candidates. I’m glad Bernie stands for Israel, and this should not even be “news.”
Well said.
But always remember, this is not a “news” website, it is a jihadi fellow traveler propaganda rag. Adjust expectations accordingly.
So have you guys patted each other on the back yet?
Palestine is a territory currently under the control of Israel, so you are almost correct, except that we are supporting them.
Bernie’s support for the status quo needs to be clarified, as the status quo is unacceptable.
Since this incident does not reflect the position of the campaign, how does it bring into question Bernie’s stance on Palestine?
I must admit that I’m disappointed with this piece. First, the headline is misleading enough to be found on HufPo – should have been: ‘Staffer at Sanders’ event shuts down dissent on Israel’ or something similar. Of all the people campaigning for the 2016 presidential election, Sanders is by far the most honestly inclusive.
Not until the 7th paragraph does the Sanders campaign receive space to discuss, again, honestly, how this was a mistake by an individual and not reflective of “campaign policy.”
I understand that “policy” at The Intercept is one that encourages journalists to pursue news stories with vigor and personal attachment, but this time, Mr. Hussain has missed the mark.
The ejection of those young students from the Sanders event is sad, but it is more a part of a larger story of the demonization of advocates for real change, and in this case they were linked to the BDS movement, of which, several articles worthy of note have been produced by The Intercept.
It is an issue that is felt deeply emotionally and resulting from oppression, death, murder, reprisal and ultimately the failure of our global society to act on in a way that is necessary – rather than relying on parliamentary procedures and political influence of the U.N. Security Council.
I hope that those students make another attempt to discuss their concerns with the Sanders campaign staff, and perhaps with the Senator himself. I think that they would find there is more common ground between them than not.
SJP does not practice “dissent”. They are a racist hate group, nothing less.
Here is a photo of the some from “the racist hate group” with their sign!
Will Ya #Feel The Bern 4 Palestine?!
And below is an article which tells us that Sanders’ campaign manager, Jeff Weaver, had a 15 minute phone conversation with “the racist hate group” and is making plans to meet with them. Let’s hope that nothing awful happens to Weaver or anyone from the Sanders campaign when they meet with the scary looking people in the photo I linked to above!
The reason pro-Palestine Boston students picked Bernie Sanders’ rally to make a statement
It is utter garbage to suggest that SJP is remotely racist or a hate group. Cite actual evidence.
thank god the IDF is not a racist terrorist group! WHEW!
Bernie Sanders invited Noam Chomsky to Burlington, VT to speak in 1985. Enough said. Both men are Jewish, but it can hardly be said that either’s loyalties “lie with the Jewish state.” Anybody who knows anything about Chomsky knows he is a fierce critic of Israel political activity in the occupied Palestinian lands. I’d wager Bernie agrees with Chomsky along these lines. Here is the video of Bernie introducing Chomsky back in ’85. Holmes is old school and been right on the money the entire time. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8mJAtT6aCzY
I think it should be obvious. Bernie Sanders is Jewish, and therefore, his loyalties most likely lie with the Jewish state. Sorry for the pro-Palestinian group, but that’s kind of how it works.
As always, it’s good form to read an article before posting a comment in response to the article. And if the article contains updates, good idea to read those also.
Sanders campaign apologizes to pro-Palestine activists threatened with arrest.
Side-note about something in the linked article: the “security officer” who told the people with the signs attending the rally that they would be arrested if they didn’t leave should be fired from whatever position of authority it is that they were in at the time of the threat to arrest.
Thanks for including the updates; they are essential for helping us understand what took place. I assume Mr. Hussain, that you were there and that this was a first person account. It’s not really clear where much of your source information is coming from. I don’t know “The Intercept_”, but the title at your head mast implies that you are just recycling someone else’s opinion that you intercepted on line. Or something. So in the interests of good journalism, please consider editing your posts to put **updates** at the beginning of your article, and not at the very end. Alternately, you could leave the current information as a footnote, and call them **backdates**. Good luck.
Update: The Sanders Campaign has apologized for the behavior of a low level volunteer who had no authority to kick people out. Bernie Sanders is in Support of a two state solution to the Israel/Palestine conflict. The Author should have included this update but did not.
Kikesuckers!
^ This is your average The Intercept-reading, “Palestine”-supporting, anti-Semitic piece of worthless trash.
yeah…. but you’re really just his cousin on the other side.
Yeah, this article is pretty biased. Here’s an alternate viewpoint:
http://www.boston.com/news/local/massachusetts/2015/10/05/bernie-sanders-campaign-says-pro-palestine-activists-should-never-have-been-kicked-out-boston-rally/QbqJeTYKFi4shsKlgk9fPK/story.html
That’s not actually an alternate viewpoint about the episode at the rally if you include the update in this article. But that’s the first time I saw and watched the video of the staffer telling them to leave. She was aggressive and dishonest in her language, and was claiming authority that she did not have.
Did you guys see the video?
First of all the guy that said ‘no’ to pro Palestinian guests was a volunteer not a member of the campaign.
Additionally, if you watch the video you’ll see that some guy (who sounds drunk) is trying to shout down Sanders which earns him a ‘shut up’. This article by M. Hussain is hugely slanted and takes a lot out of context or doesn’t provide the reasons for the events that took place.
I also find it fascinating that Republican and conservatives posting here are standing up for Palestine- did you guys suddenly forget that you’ve spent the past three decades promoting Israel over it’s neighbors?
AS SALAM IS IT NOT TIME THAT WE CALL UPON PRESIDENTIAL CANDIDATES TO MAKE COMPREHENSIVE POLICY STATEMENT ON THE PALESTINIAN ISSUE AT LEAST THE FRONT RUNNERS. REMEMBER HOW ROMNEY WAS SUMMONED TO ISRAEL AFTER HE WAS NOMINATED AS REPUBLICAN NOMINEE, WE SHOULD TAKE LESSONS FROM THE JEWISH LOBBY. SANDERS SHOULD NOT BE ABLE TO GET AWAY JUST BY FIRING AN INNOCENT VOLUNTEER. THE PALESTINIAN ISSUE IS BIGGER THAN IRAQ, , AFGANISTAN, IRAN NUCLEAR DEAL AND ISIS COMBINED IT HAS BEEN ALMOST 70 YEARS HOW MANY REFUGEE DISPERSED ALL OVER THE WORLD HOW MANY CHILDREN,WOMEN AND MEN KILLED WITH WITH WELL PLANNED CONTEMPT AND IMPUNITY. WE SHOULD CALL UPON SANDERS CAMPAIGN TO REINSTATE THE INNOCENT VOLUNTEER AND ISSUE DETAIL POLICY THAT IS WERE THE PROOF IS.
Yes, we know Israel is a big issue. Yes, Bernie, being the leader of his campaign, should take some responsibility. However, no, his views and the way he chooses to deal with things do not completely match all of his volunteers. That volunteer completely overstepped their bounds of responsibility, and we’ll never know the real reason for the harsh treatment of those students.
“Palestine” is a complete non-issue.
Why is it that “pro-palestinian” protesters are being picked on? Maybe because they refuse to recognize the simple fact that when pro-palestinian TERRORISTS under the guise of “protest” kill innocent unarmed civilians in front of their children for NO REASON other than ignorance it is very hard for a sane rational individual to have any sympathy for their cause – are their injustices? yes, but wanton murder doesn’t rectify them..where are the responsible leaders? Oh yes – there aren’t any – the leaders are busy teaching hate – hate burn kill sacrifice….become a martyr-
And there it is.. (we knew that)
The little Jewish commie with a capitol J.
Aren’t you just a bucket of random anti-semitism.
Every republican candidate since Reagan has said the same exact thing…
Hahahaha! #FeeltheBern! Face it, you’re beloved socialist sold you a bill of goods. You’re all just as blind as the idiot supporters of Trump and the GOP. You really think choosing one of the handful of selected useful idiots running for POTUS is going to change course of the US towards Israel? Let alone one who is Jewish and a Socialist….just like Israel.
Sheesh…”your beloved socialist”. Stupid autocorrect….
I would never vote for a Jew for President.
It’s a free country.
Now that he is gaining political strength, is Sanders and his growing ego copying other American leaders in opposing dissent? It appears so. That makes him as untrustworthy as Clinton and Trump. Shame.
I suggest that the job for Sanders supporters is not to defend him on this issue, but rather to pull him out. Insist that he address it in a way that is satisfactory to them (his base).
I honestly do not yet know why Sanders is running–whether he thinks he can actually win the nomination, or whether he has the more modest goal of pulling the field of Democratic candidates to the left. Either goal is worthwhile, but neither is advanced by running away and hiding from such an important foreign policy issue.
Sanders doesn’t want to talk about Israel/Palestine, and largely he hasn’t. It’s up to his supporters to change that.
America Revisits Socialism: http://restlessboomers.com/america-revisits-socialism/
The claims by Bernie’s campaign should be put to the test at the next rally.
I’d love to see 1000 signs about justice for Palestinians.
If they’re allowed, as his campaign manager said the ones in Boston should have been, I will continue to support Bernie as the best realistic option.
My heart is with Jill, but my head is with Bernie, and I’ll tell you why.
There is nothing progressive or liberal about the Israeli one state apartheid status quo.
I think a two state solution is no longer possible, and, while it is possible that Bernie will “evolve” to support a one state solution with equal rights for all, I don’t think such an evolution is probable… and those insisting he will evolve once elected are delusional.
But electing Bernie would lead to progress in one of two ways.
One possibility is that if Bernie is elected, there will be tremendous pressure on him as our first Jewish president to be more evenhanded with Israel than what we’ve seen from Obama and far more than what we would get from Hillary or any of the Repubs… to actually follow through on the reasonable positions he has taken on Israel to end their expansionism and end the occupation.
The other possibility is that he maintains the current status quo of coddling Israel.
In that case, I believe the BDS movement would see explosive growth in no small part due to his betrayal of his campaign promises. The “left” is already wary of being Obama’d again, and it would not go over without blowback.
But progress could still be achieved through Bernie’s domestic agenda… regardless of the foreign policy results.
I believe it unlikely that Bernie’s whole agenda will get through Congress, but given that most of what he is proposing is actually mainstream, with a large majority of voters behind everything from an increased minimum wage, to education access, infrastructure, reducing inequality, etc… it is likely at least some progress will be achieved even after compromising, particularly if he can keep his supporters engaged in the “revolution” and keep the pressure on the establishment.
Bernie’s history suggests he will keep fighting. He could have sold out long ago and had a much easier political life, but he didn’t.
And whatever progress we can make towards a happier, healthier, and more educated citizenry is likely to create a demand for better foreign policies too.
The other thing to consider is that he would be re-cracking a glass ceiling… making it possible for other socialist democratic candidates to be elected at the local, state and federal level… hopefully even some on his coattails in this election… and end the 30 year shift towards the right by both parties.
(I tried to keep this comment short… I know I didn’t go into much detail or discuss some other potential pitfalls, so please jump in and have at it… I didn’t think I’d ever support another major party candidate again, so I understand those who still have doubts)
And, yes, I will be voting for Jill if Bernie doesn’t win the nomination.
Fuck the neolibcons.
Hedges may be right. Sanders be be all about power
The BLM protesters (who may or may not have had any actual connection to that organization) weren’t just holding signs. They were seizing the microphone and disrupting the entire event. Whether or not you think the situation justifies such action, it’s totally unrealistic to expect a candidate at his own campaign rally to be willing to cede control to anyone with a grievance who is pushy enough. A group holding a sign in the crowd is a far different thing. For the moment, I’ll believe the campaign when they say it was a mistake. If they continue to indulge in such maneuvers, it will point out an important weakness of character that needs to be taken into account.
Why are you making things up? Even the Sanders election committee apologized for this action and blamed it on a “low level administrator”. Where is this BS about “seizing the microphone” coming from? Oh, yeah… likely an Israeli shill…
“The BLM protesters weren’t just holding signs. They were seizing the microphone and disrupting the entire event”. BLM stands for Black Lives Matter. Tony is referring to the fact that this article writer tried to conflate the silencing of Israel protesters with the hostile actions of BLM protesters as if the events had anything to do with one another or showed some sort of pattern. They don’t.
Bernie Sanders Is Jewish so I would expect for him to have a more tolerant attitude toward Israel. I personally think the billions in aid we have thrown away on Israel and other mid-east countrys has been a waste. It seems to me that the Palestinians and the Israelis want the same land. Because Israel has managed to threaten, cajole, buy and bully our lawmakers they will no doubt take it all. with our aid and consent. I fear this conflict will start a world war. Shame on Bernie.
Bernie Sanders is the ONLY candidate who has stood up against the abuse of Palestinians in the past. Keep in mind that Israel is our base in the Middle East. The money we give them in foreign aide is spent back into the United States on weaponry, so they are very much a part of our economy and our ONLY war allies in that part of the world. Still Bernie has stood up for them calling out support for Palestinians to have their own State. Here he is in 1988 https://youtu.be/TocimL0AT1w All American voters deserve representation but Bernie is not going to war so easily.
This video is 30 years old.
If he still supports Palestinians, why does he not say so? He should address the questions and tell us where he stands on that issue now.
Bernie is more sympathetic to Palestine than any other major candidate, including Rand Paul. I would LOVE to debate anyone who says otherwise.
Typical liberal coward. Now everyone sees that the Israeli lobby has Bernie in their pocket.
I bet you see jewish conspiracies overflowing from your little tea cup. right?
The fact and reality of the Israel Lobby is not a conspiracy theory, Jewish or otherwise. There’s a scholarly (if now somewhat dated) book by the title and a mainstream UK TV news magazine did a good episode on the lobby in Britain.
Now everyone sees that the Israeli lobby has Bernie in their pocket.
And that lobby makes sure it gets what it wants.
Apologies or not, recognize that this unfortunate attack is indicative of the Senator’s choice to side with evil upon the larger stage of world conflict. This is what is going on with the destruction of Syria, where ISIS, which is CIA, is being fed by the Saudi’s, Turks and Israeli’s and of course by the Obama Administration. So when Bernie says he would bring in the Saudi’s, then we know that this man is on the side of what is nothing less than treason, or he is completely stupid, which in someways what this conniving forked tongued fake is. I am sorry I wish it were not so, but there is a very dangerous reality which Bernie is a part of, as Senator to which as Senator he has a duty to act against, but he does not and thus plays this game of using people with his
speeches and waving his arms in the air, the all knowing, never really listening,
but telling, telling, telling, and how telling it is to see this little stunt…apologies are not enough, stopping World War III is the only reasonable thing to do and it is not Bernie who is against this shit,
Gotta love it when someone says “of course” about the most wildly improbable ideas. IS has certainly fed off off US foreign policy missteps, but only a doctrinaire fool would claim that they have the administration’s support. I maintain, Mr. Marshall, that you are in fact that fool.
Indeed TonyM
Most of the reports from Syria are pretty clear that the “rebels” Obama’s CIA are funding and arming are collaborating with al Qaida… not IS.
Our “allies” the Saudis on the other hand…
Though that may be true how do you not go one step further, literally just one small step, and conclude that al-Qaeda is collaborating with ISIS against the West as their leader al-Zawahiri said they would?
Maybe they will hobbes.
But right now, they are doing our bidding in our regime change effort against Assad… not “collaborating” against us.
It is also true that some of the CIA trained and armed “rebels” have joined IS.
But our ongoing support is going to al Qaida and cooperating “moderate” militants.
Of course, we continue to turn a blind eye to our “allies” aiding IS… it’s really a distinction without a difference as we have no control over the weapons and ammunition once delivered.
It is safe to say we are on the wrong side in Syria, and it will come back to bit us in the ass.
Seriously? A “doctrinaire fool” is who you portray those connecting a couple of close dots to be?
While this administration may not support ISIS overall, they are currently fighting on the same side. This is a fairly simple connection to make as we are supporting rebels fighting against al-Assad while groups like al-Qaeda and ISIS are doing the same, thus making them our allies in this current conflict regardless of any exit strategy (which like in Iraq is probably inexistent or extremely vague), no?
It seems that in reality you are the doctrinaire, who by definition is most likely a fool, for not making simple connections that are actually quite far from “wildly improbable ideas.”
Just Like all other politicians, Sander’s allegiance is to Israhell first otherwise, he would not have been re-selected after his first turn.
Sanders is just another delusional party loyalist. As the last 50 years or so, it doesn’t matter which party is placed in power, the American ship keeps sinking deeper. Sad to see the Hope & Change crowed being fooled again. I would be shocked to see anyone not a psychopath willing to lead America. http://www.counterpunch.org/2015/07/21/bernie-out-of-the-closet-sanders-longstanding-deal-with-the-democrats/
Bernie Sanders is the ONLY candidate who has stood up against the abuse of Palestinians in the past. Keep in mind that Israel is our base in the Middle East. The money we give them in foreign aide is spent back into the United States on weaponry, so they are very much a part of our economy and our ONLY war allies in that part of the world. Still Bernie has stood up for them calling out support for Palestinians to have their own State. Here he is in 1988 https://youtu.be/TocimL0AT1w All American voters deserve representation but Bernie is not going to war so easily.
I hope you’re getting paid to cut and paste your bullshit.
Your agenda is clear. Your logic is also clear — as mud.
1) A low level staffer made a mistake, and you accuse Sanders of being intolerant? No Sir. It is you that is intolerant of Sanders pro-Israel record. So you make a lame attempt to link this low level staffer’s actions all the way up the chain to the candidate himself. What a load of crap. But then it gets worse.
2) You say Sanders was criticized for handling the Black Lives Matter protesters [in Seattle]. He YIELDED the stage to those protesters! So first he’s [allegedly] intolerant because of an action of a low level staffer, but when HE HIMSELF yields the stage to the Black Lives Matter protesters you say he was TOO tolerant. Do you even read what you write? Plus, those two ladies that stormed the stage turned out NOT to be BLM members, so you even got that wrong.
If you have suckered someone into paying you to write this crap, well, good on you. Because as an attack dog, you are wholly toothless.
Please see my comment here.
Bernie may not be as good on Israel as I would like him to be. He is still the only major candidate who has expressed real concern for Palestine and, unlike the other candidates, he would push hard for the 2 state solution.
Unfortunately, many people don’t think rationally, and the Palestinians might pay the price for it
What other country in the world could get away with the land grab and behavior the Israeli’s display in Palestine ? Why can’t Russia annex land that was historically connected to Moscow when we condone Israel stealing Palestine’s land ?
In the “shut up” clip, Sanders mentioned Netanyahu’s talking points about the missiles and tunnels, from last years “lawn mowing,” but I’d like to know, if he were president, how he would deal with the fascist tactics used by the FDL and Feinstein’s husband on US universities.
http://www.truthdig.com/report/item/exposed_pro-israel_modern_day_mccarthyites_20151001
http://www.truthdig.com/report/item/cash_right-wing_extremists_train_future_zealots_pro-israel_campus_20151006
Shows how Sanders is way behind his own supporters on such issues, stuck in the amber of his1940s-50s youth, when he went by his birth name, Bernard Finkelstein.
What the hell difference is it what his birth name is? Are you allowing your anti-semitism to show by zeroing in on the name Finkelstein? I think so! Furthermore, there is nothing “progressive” about the idea of a single state solution, the result of which would be the suicide of Israel.
First of all, I love the name Finkelstein. Norman Finkelstein is one of my favorite people on the planet.
How would a one state solution be the suicide of Israel? It would be the suicide of Israel as an apartheid state with different laws based on ethnicity. How else would it be the death of Israel?
Should America be a Christian nation? Are Jews and Hindus and Muslims and Sikhs the death of America? Or do you have different standards for different countries?
Unfortunate that on many such issues Bernie is republicanesque, stuck in the Brooklyn of the 1950s, way behind his own supporters, when he went by the name Finkelstein.
Cue all the wishful thinkers complaining about this piece being biased and thinking THIS time there really WILL be hope and change in 5…4…3…2…
Update I: Added comment from the Sanders campaign, responding to a prior request from The Intercept. Oct 5 11:50 pm.
Correction: A previous version of the story identified the “shut up” incident as taking place in August 2015, whereas it should have indicated August 2014.
Update II: Sanders campaign manager Jeff Weaver has indicated the staffer responsible for the ejections has been removed from their position, and reiterated the decision to remove the students does not reflect campaign policy.
(This way works best; at the top)
Good job on Jeff Weaver for firing the low level staffer responsible for those ejections. Hopefully those kids bring their signs to another Bernie rally and don’t give up on democracy. Bernie Sanders has never shied away from sensitive, complex issues. He’ll what he believes and stand by those convictions for the record regardless on if people agree with him or don’t.
I’m not sure that the staffer had to be fired. Weaver could just have had him apologize and clarified an official position for the campaign.
Not fired. Reassigned to other tasks.
I don’t mind people pushing candidates to acknowledge their stance on sensitive issues, but I think there is a better way to go about such a complex issue. Is an ambush technique the best mode of operation in 2015? Especially with a candidate who seems by most accounts rational and thoughtful with his policies. The US stance in all Arab countries, including Palestine is atrocious. Our constant war in Afghanistan, our illegal war in Iraq and our complete denial of the sovereignty of countries like Pakistan, Yemen, Syria and Jordan is disgusting and has created a generation of so called terrorists. This is a very complicated subject, and one that deserves more than juvenile ambush tactics with gigantic placards. I think the Sanders people are growing tired of activists who demand to be heard and disrupt Bernie from getting his message out. He is trying to win an election, and while Palestine is important, it is not the main pillar Bernie is running for president on. He is running as an American populist who is championing the middle class and economic inequality. I am sure Bernie will develop a coherent foreign policy, but he is very focused on the US economy and wealth inequality, and that is what he is coshing to talk about. The US policy towards the Middle East has been horrific for decades, and I do not think it will change because of sophomoric ambush tactics. Activism is great, but in 2015 I think it’s time we re-approach how we protest. If this article is encouraging some kind of ‘anti-Jewish’ Zionist fears, I think you have the wrong guy. Bernie is no Zionist.
You’re not completely correct on Bernie’s position on Israel.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Vf2cCdgwgoM
We definitely need to know a bit more. Whether Bernie realizes it or not, the people who support him are the same kinds of people who disagree with Israel’s policies.
There are lots of Bernie supporters who’d like some clarification on his position on Israel/Palestine. We hope it has evolved and would like to know how it has evolved.
amen … I bet the issue will be debated on with Hillary.
Bernie Sanders is the ONLY candidate who has stood up against the abuse of Palestinians in the past. Keep in mind that Israel is our base in the Middle East. The money we give them in foreign aide is spent back into the United States on weaponry, so they are very much a part of our economy and our ONLY war allies in that part of the world. Still Bernie has stood up for them calling out support for Palestinians to have their own State. Here he is in 1988 https://youtu.be/TocimL0AT1w All American voters deserve representation but Bernie is not going to war so easily.
Is this what they teach you? How about the US gives military aid to everyone, and then everyone can buy US weapons and then become part of the economy? wtf kind of bs logic is that?
Is Egypt also our “only” ally in “that” part of the world because the US gives them aid? How about Saudi Arabia? Do you Israel lovers ever think anything through when it comes to Israel? And do you think others do not?
Sadly, no major candidate for president has a progressive policy toward Palestine. That said, I still find Sanders’ policies, overall, to be far more favorable than the corporate-owned war hawk Clinton and any of the Republican (with the exception of Rand Paul, who, like a broken clock, can be right twice a day).
And this begs the question: WHY? Why is NO candidate willing to take on Israel? And why are Israel’s fingerprints ALL OVER 9/11? And why did JFK die so soon after stopping Israel from getting nukes? And why was LBJ sleeping with an Israeli spy? WHY?
Greenwald, have you lost control? This is journalism? A low-level volunteer acts out against policy at one rally and Intercept says whole campaign? Really? Sander’s campaign manager: 1) said it was low-level volunteer, 2) apologized to students effected, 3) says it should not have happened, and 4) clarified with staffers it should never happen. … what’s going on over there at The Intercept? I expect more.
I think they cant keep up with the pace of information. The issue was likely corrected before they even decided to do this piece and didnt bother to check the situation for changes and updates.
The headline is an over-the-top generalization for scant evidence cited. They know most people only read headlines. It’s a hit piece. It’s a hatchet job. I expected more from Intercept.
The article is wrong in implying that support for Israel is not Progressive. Israel may make mistakes from time to time in fighting the perpetual battles for its right not to be exterminated but it works harder than anyone else not to (see America hitting a hospital yesterday, the Russians cluster bombing entire towns..etc.) At a macro level, Israel stands for tolerance and the Palestinians, at least at a level that would constitute a governing majority, still worship at the alter of “martyrdom” – not to mention homophobia, misogyny and antisemitism.
It is a sad fact that what Golda Meir wrote many decades still stands. If the Arabs gave up their weapons, they would have peace. If the Jews did, they would be killed. If you honestly think this is not true than you are entirely delusional.
Israel is not above criticism for the settlements and I don’t know anyone that would think disarming would be a good idea. I do think you made a good point in grouping Israel with the US and Russia though because all three use their military for national gain and not just defense.
Israel uses cluster munitions by the millions.
Israel shoots heavy artillery at children playing on the beach .
Israel bombs fully occupied apartment buildings to kill one “terrorist”.
Israel has been killing Arabs since 1946.
If the Jews think Israel has done them any favors they are sadly mistaken. Israel has painted a yellow star once again upon itself; a star shaped as the letters BDS.
This is the kind of bullshit that the South African Whites used to say about the South African Blacks. We all know that the Blacks in South Africa did not avenge Apartheid in the way we were told.
The problem with your imagination is that it is limited by the inhuman behavior you perpetrate on the Palestinians. So you cannot imagine a different reaction. You’re the delusional one.
Read yourself some Max Blumenthal. You’ve buried and jailed the Palestinian Mandelas. And you have produced no Israeli DeClerks. You have no right to your high horse. Nobody is impressed with your logic anymore.
Nope: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pK6VLFdWJ4I
Sanders is intentionally unclear on the Palestine issue because he is for doing the right thing there, but he knows that if he says that publicly, the pro-israel lobby would make him lose the election.
As I wrote to the campaign, Bernie is the man who can stand up to the Israel Lobby if he chooses to do so. Nixon to China; Bernie vs. AIPAC
A Sanders campaigner recently stated the same thing to me when I was questioning her on Mr. Sanders platform on Palestine/ Israel . My thinking in response was how can a candidate who presents himself as the moral ethical alternative possibly be silent on this issue. Especially in light of the very recent massacre of Protective Edge in Gaza. I think we are at such a dangerous times in our nation , that anyone who is running for political office needs to be very clear where they stand on any and all issues. Mr. Obama’s campaign was much like Mr. Sanders, appealing to the youth and the left. What we received as President Obama was very different then candidate Obama. I do not know about others but Mr. Obama really gave me pause to trust or believe any candidate ever again. Mr. Sanders please clarify your stand on this issue. Jill Stein , has stated her where she stands on this issue. Step up to the plate Mr. Sanders.
And if he changes his mind later, he will loose his life.
Sincerely Yours,
The Hilary Clinton Campaign Team
seriously
If Bernie had let them it would not change anything for the Palestinians. But would have been harmful to his campaign. Which was probably the goal of the dissenters.
People often say that human rights activists are never going to get American foreign policies changed so that the American rhetoric of support for human rights is matched by policies supporting human rights (other than when that sort of policy is a transparent fig leaf over American attempts to force regime change, often over the objections of the targeted nation’s population, onto a nation that doesn’t worship at the feet of the Washington Lobbies) But the occasional (one might even say rare) success in such activists in getting such a change (or, more accurately, opening up the space for others in the American Axis to make such changes without suffering the wrath of Washington) allows human rights activists to feel that they’re doing something about the issue with these protests (rather like playing the lottery makes people feel that they have a chance at getting rich). And the polling numbers linked to suggest they are making some progress towards ending support for a human rights abuse so egregious and insidious that it is defined as a crime against humanity (as laid out in the ICSPCA international agreement)
Sad to see that the (important) update that was given before the article was run is stated at the bottom of the story and took so long to make it in. I understand that it’s possible they could have lied but it’s pretty critical to the whole incident.
I’m all for criticizing Sen. Sanders the same as everyone else despite my bias towards him, but there is a fine line between a legitimate criticism and what happened here.
So… the campaign said it was an error. Is there reason to believe that’s not true? Terrible headline here.
There are some older progressives that are sending him money too and I send each check with a hard copy letter expressing my desire that Bernie come clean on Israel. If he continues to support the Gaza War Crimes or otherwise supports the current “mow(ing) of the grass”, he’ll get no more money from me. On the other hand, Hillary and all of the Republicans are promising more war and more love and weapons for Israel, so what’s left?
Pro Tip: They cash your check. A low level volunteer skims your letter to make sure there’s no death threat or actionable information, and tosses it in the recycling bin.
Just like watching a bad TV ironically is not noted in the Neilson ratings, your personal caveats are not noted in your support.
If Bernie Sanders’ standard-issue center-right mainstream foreign policy (plenty of war, drones, mass surveillance, and support for Israel and Saudi Arabia) is a deal breaker, let the deal be broken. After all – he would only pull further right once in office.
The other option is to withhold support from anyone. Wouldn’t you rather your demographic (foreign policy doves) be courted than take for granted?
Congrats on throwing your money away. There is not a single politician on the planet that would ever get money from me.
Here’s one more reason why I’m proud to support Bernie for president, even if he has little realistic chance of winning the nomination. Try to name another politician who would admit he was wrong about anything, much less a sensitive subject like Black Lives Matter. http://tiny.cc/p4jc4x I can only wish for an epidemic of such candor among all the other candidates, Democrat and Republican. http://tiny.cc/p4jc4x
pretty much sums up my view of this article and the comment feed
https://youtu.be/6GggY4TEYbk
In the morass of US politics, there doesn’t seem to be anyone who’s serious about all the real issues threatening the US. Either it’s a right that’s more extreme than ever or a left that’s right of center. It really is like watching a pep rally for a high school football game only the US is the loosing team. Do any of the candidates want to address the climate crisis, the Israeli’s, the violence in our country. All I see are inane talking points meant to appease some mythical ideology of unsustainable consumption. Is the middle east reduced to tribal warfare with 21st century weaponry? Really, there are some real serious issues and all I see are idiotic stances that are not based on reality. The candidates now just appear as caricatures on a cereal box to look at before the morning blog. I’ll miss the country I grew up in because with all the problems arising now freedom will be in name only and democracy a dream by people whose ideas are now a distant past.
Bla bla bla to all those disgruntled by these fabulous Interceptors and the stories they bring us…
Presidents may come and go but at the end of the day, it’s the permanent government the one who says who, what, when, where, how. Look at Kennedy, Carter and Obama.
OK. So the staffer was kicked out of the campaign. Good, but still I have my doubts as to what the real Bernie thinks about the I/P conflict, and how he sees the unconditional support the US has given the apartheid government of Israel.
I’ll be keeping close tabs on future rallies and want to see him answer many of these questions, including what is his position about gun control and guns in general.
Bernie Sanders is the ONLY candidate who has stood up against the abuse of Palestinians in the past. Keep in mind that Israel is our base in the Middle East. The money we give them in foreign aide is spent back into the United States on weaponry, so they are very much a part of our economy and our ONLY war allies in that part of the world. Still Bernie has stood up for them calling out support for Palestinians to have their own State. Here he is in 1988 https://youtu.be/TocimL0AT1w All American voters deserve representation but Bernie is not going to war so easily.
Test comment.
I got it. When the republicans do it it is an absolute outrage. When any of the democrats do it it’s completely fine and dandy. And vice versa. This is one of the reasons why America is finished. Americans are infantile and they treat politics like a spectator sport. Ra ra ra go team! Whichever loser emerges from this electoral cesspool this country will deserve in spades.
As a campaign professional, THIS from the article sums up the entire situation and I’d put money on it being 100% correct.
“Two days after the students were ejected, a day after the group posted about the encounter on Facebook, a Sanders 2016 spokesperson acknowledged a campaign staffer was behind the ejection and that an error had been made. “What happened was a poor decision by a low-level staffer and doesn’t reflect campaign policy,” the spokesperson said.”
I can’t tell you how many young staffers I’ve managed who are SO high strung to do a good job that they lose common sense. What will be telling is the follow up on this. If the campaign continues this behavior, it’s a problem, if not, this was a isolated incident.
I saw no name listed as to the campaign worker.I bet she was Jewish.
Who da Nazis?
That’s obvious. It’s you.
You.
Here’s a good blog that details Israel’s atrocities in Palestine: http://www.peterloud.co.uk/palestine/
Other good sources:
Mondoweiss
Electronic Intifada
B’tselem
972mag
Follow Max Blumenthal, David Sheen, Rania Khalek, Ronnie Barkan on Twitter
I’m going to recommend you add one more source to your reading, PCHRGaza org. Their weekly report, detailing the wheres, whens, hows, as well as summaries and statistics, make for enlightening (though depressing, and often nauseous) reading, and the reports extend (slightly) back to before the first rocket flew the other way (I never did the research to find out what line of bovine fertilizer the Israeli regime and its supporters and propagandists trotted out to ‘justify’ the Israeli regime bombing Gaza’s water treatment plant weeks before they could spin the nonsense about it being used to source the propellant for the rockets the Israeli civilians (which the Refugees are) fire in vain attempts to protect themselves from the regime that denies them voting rights)
Sanders campaign fires volunteer for threatening pro-Palestine students with arrest: http://hill.cm/7zKBYhv
please check out murtaza hussain twitter page “Bernie Sanders campaign called me and made clear that the ejection of the SJP students was not campaign policy. Update soon.”
So,
let’s encourage more people to show up at his next speaking engagements
with signs and demanding answers as to how much he will do to
challenge the Israeli prison camp/torture yard known as Gaza!
please insist id be curious as well..but here’s some important facts before you do
https://youtu.be/sCNrK-n68CM
kind regards
What a surprise! Maybe Murtaza should’ve contacted the campaign before jumping to conclusions and writing this very misleading article on how ‘Sanders purges dissent’
You really should do something about your reading comprehension problem.
Sanders campaign fires volunteer for threatening pro-Palestine students with arrest: http://hill.cm/7zKBYhv
good #feelingthebern for Palestine
Good for Bernie. The Pals stand for misogyny, homophobia Jew hatred and violence. All things that he opposes. He gets my vote
Lies from the Zionist hasbara playbook. That’s how Israel has been able to sustain its brutality and ethnic cleansing of Palestinians for so long (along with the billions in weapons and aid from the US and its silence). Give a voice to the oppressors and their propaganda, shut out the voices of the victims and spread lies about them.
Go fuck yourself, Reggie.
Yeah! go fuck yourself, Reggie Green, or whoever the heck you are!
Bernie Sanders is the ONLY candidate who has stood up against the abuse of Palestinians in the past. Keep in mind that Israel is our base in the Middle East. The money we give them in foreign aide is spent back into the United States on weaponry, so they are very much a part of our economy and our ONLY war allies in that part of the world. Still Bernie has stood up for them calling out support for Palestinians to have their own State. Here he is in 1988 https://youtu.be/TocimL0AT1w All American voters deserve representation but Bernie is not going to war so easily.
The Zionists stand for hatred and the fantasy of racial superiority,which makes people hate them.See how easy it is?
You obviously know all about hatred. It’s your “thang”
Strangely, the Zionists stood for racial inferiority in the past. What has changed?
David Ben Gurion (the first Israeli Prime Minister): “If I were an Arab leader, I would never sign an agreement with Israel. It is normal; we have taken their country. It is true God promised it to us, but how could that interest them? Our God is not theirs. There has been Anti – Semitism, the Nazis, Hitler, Auschwitz, but was that their fault ? They see but one thing: we have come and we have stolen their country. Why would they accept that?”
-Quoted by Nahum Goldmann in Le Paraddoxe Juif (The Jewish Paradox), pp121.
Let’s be honest. If you think every American Jew has “dual loyalty” then you are an anti-Semite. So screw you.
To be fair, Bernie takes serious heat from BOTH sides of the Israel/Palestine issue. Might be a reasonable indication that he could be on the right track.
Maybe look up the Golden Mean fallacy
The reason it is OK to say who you would not permit to lead a party is because people making decisions about their leadership need to know what kind of iceholes participate in it. Otherwise, you’d think socialists were nothing but a bunch of bleeding heart liberals. How much blood can you sop up, shirt vendor?
OMG, Tree is both an Anita and a Teresa, so I’m looking for a Red Shirted Sicilian. Mafia matters. Need to check your root cellar, Garibaldi.
This “dissent at event “ event sounds like a minor, and typical incident, if unfortunate.
And assuming God has told you that Sanders is the saviour, giving him a pass, seems like good tactical advice. (cue the Obama clips of “yes we can”, “hope and change”, people weeping at the inauguration)
Obama supporters had similar advice: “don’t worry, he’s an eleven dimensional chess player, you’ll see)
Well we saw, and now some want to vet the candidates a little better this time.
Myself, I’ve tried to follow Sanders’ career, he’s done some good stuff, and most markedly, he’s not an absolute loon, which at least to my eyes, is a plus. Obama too, can speak, and sound sane, over long periods, and yet, Afghanistan, Iraq, Libya, Syria, Guantanamo, renditions, war on terror, immunity for law breaking telecoms, immunity for Wall Street fraud, immunity for torturers etc.
Sure, I’m hoping Sanders repeats what Corbyn did in the UK, he looks, like one of the best of a bad lot. At the same time, being an evidenced based person, I’m kind of looking for evidence from Sanders.
Is there rhetoric from the major candidates better than this:
http://www.timesofisrael.com/where-does-bernie-sanders-stand-on-israel/
Personally, I’m not happy with Sanders saying he wants to be “even-handed” with the powerful settler colonists and the indigenous refugees under military occupation. But him saying that, in today’s America, is as good as it gets, unfortunately.
Things are shifted in the US. People say that Obama occupies the political space of a moderate Republican of the seventies, And Sanders is as close as any major presidential candidate comes in this day and age to straying from pro-apartheid policy for Israel.
Straight from the horses mouth …
Personally, I think he’s only half right. .. and not the better half.
Obomba occupies the political space of GWB, the lesser shrub.
He’s a neocons neocon,backs the Ziomonsters to the hilt,(his whole govt is full of the traitors,he’s murdered thousands in the name of the War of Terror,helped to further destabilize the ME,and not one iota of criticism for the monsters repeated and ongoing depredations.
He’s also,in his fantasy of American superiority,reopened the cold war,and is helping it morph into a hot war,the last thing we need.
He is terrible,a putz of global proportion.
And if Sanders wants to win the voting public,or at least those inclined to vote for a democratic socialist,he’d better ditch all his neolibcon creeps in his staff and his zio mind,because we won’t support another fraud,like Obomba.
O just a low level staffer! Bernie Sanders is no different from the other clowns running for head puppet. He’s a demon in angel skin.
I’m for a Palestinian state which totally is what Bernie Sanders is for. I’m not for Bebe a war monger looking for a reason, I’m not for antisemitic blowhards using every chance to shit can Jews and rewrite the holocaust. I’m not jewish, I’m world citizen who sees all of this as completely fucking obsolete – So don’t waste our time. Get to work. FeeltheBern
Somehow I thought The Intercept was above the spreading of misleading political propaganda. But I see The Intercept has joined the mainstream media in its desire to distort the truth. Sanders has already apologized to the students who were asked not to display their sign, and has said those volunteers will not be working any of his rallies in the future.This was done by low level volunteers who were no doubt trying to avoid a possible disruption of this enormous rally. Sanders is willing to discuss any issue openly, has not ever in his career refused to talk about an issue, and will no doubt offer a very clear stance on this or any other issue if a person has the integrity to actually ask him directly. But its a lot easier to simply disseminate a load of totally misleading BS and half truths in an attempt to distort the truth. So to The Intercept, I would like to welcome you to the ranks of the propaganda machine, otherwise known as the mainstream media. Congratulations!
Every statement in the article is true, so what’s your problem?
I’m a big Sanders supporter – we need to keep him honest. Don’t be nice to your politicians, even the ones you like.
For starters, the title itself is worded so that most people will assume the Sanders campaign has a policy of disallowing dissent at its events. This is, in fact, the exact opposite of the truth. A truthful title would be ” Sanders Campaign Volunteer Violates Policy , Has Protestors Ejected” While not technically false, the author’s wording of title effectively gives the false impression of Sanders as someone who discourages protestors. Nothing could be further from the truth. Effective propaganda always contains some degree of truth so that the reader comes away with a false impression. Sanders has been completely honest when given a chance to reply on any issue. His response to the the Black Lives Matter protest in Seattle was unprecedented… starting with his speech just hours after the protest he began stressing the importance of institutional racism. Instead of acknowledging that fact the article states that he has a ” tendency to marginalize rather than engage critics.” Again, nothing could be further from the truth. The article is an excellent example of spinning a meaningless event into something sinister. That is what propaganda is all about. What really happened was that one of Sanders volunteers took it upon herself to ask the students to take down their sign or else leave the event, and as a result of that bad decision the volunteer will not be working in that capacity for the Sanders campaign in the future. Nothing more to the story. But that doesn’t make a very eye catching story, does it? It’s much more exciting to make it sound as though Sanders is having protestors thrown out of his events. Which of course is total BS, also known as propaganda, but most readers will not pick up on that and will come away with a completely false impression of Sanders. So my point is, this is an excellent piece of propaganda intended to make Sanders himself look like someone who is completely callous to the plight of the Palestinians. Nothing could be further from the truth.
The term “low level staffer” is merely an euphemism for “fall guy.” Low level campaign staffers are not empowered to make such decisions. Anyone with have a brain could see that the potential ramifications resulting from the forcible ejection of dissenters from a political rally would require a senior level response. If Sanders is sincere in his apology then he ought to speak openly and candidly to the concerns raised by the ejected activists in that apology.
I appreciate this reporting because I was not aware of the incident, but it seems to be sorely lacking in nuance. What you say about Bernie’s response to the Black Lives Matter movement is canned–I’ve heard the same bland account from all media sources. The truth is far more complicated, and interesting. It bears mentioning that Bernie led a civil rights march when he was at U Chicago protesting the school’s policy of segregated dormitories. Should not his actions on these issues be more salient than the occasional inartful response to disruptive, albeit legitimate, interjections?
Not sure you want to go there, Dan. Sanders’ history and record on civil rights with respect to the black community is a matter of fact and hews to his favor. His history and record on Israel-Palestine conflict is also a matter of fact, and isn’t laudatory.
Sanders know that is the only way to Win or even stay in the game. So it could be tactic. Statistically speaking when and if he becomes president he will kill about 2 million civilians so i would not expect him to be a saint or an angle but as far as the verbal policy goes he have to make sure he even have a chance.
Was it a slow news day Murtaza? I don’t see the point of this article at all and I’m a big fan of The Intercept. You said in your article “What happened was a poor decision by a low-level staffer and doesn’t reflect campaign policy.”
What part of “reporting” don’t you understand? Something happened at a big rally for one of the leading Democratic contenders , and Hussain and the Intercept are reporting it. This is not an opinion piece,
That the low-level staffer made a poor decision which the campaign did not support was not known when the article was published. If you read the updates at the end you will see it was added subsequent to the publication; at publication it appeared the campaign had no comment on the banning of the citizens.
Hot damn, I know what I’m carrying to Bernie’s picnic at Reed Park this Fryday. “The Berner! Toss him for a HillBerry?” Hope it’s hot.
Hate his policy on guns, Israel and humor, what a let down. Still gonna give him Hill’s vote. I’ve been waiting to vote socialist since I spent the weekend with him! Don’t die on me, Old Man!
Oh, my, I might have misspelled my address just to get a vote in on this madness. Sue me, supreme court jesters!
Hey guys, just wanted to congratulate you on this article. Keep it up! We’ve got a small team of hackers that will provide this article on “The Intercept_” with over 50k hits per day for 90 days. I’ll be providing Betsy with insider information as we work against Bernie. We can win this! Also, we’re going to give you guys a copy of the debate questions, in case you can drop some hints in your upcoming articles this week. K, talk to you guys soon! Biden says hi.
We can always use humor, so ty
Can someone be pro-peace, pro-israel, and pro-palestine at the same time? Question #1: Which candidate holds the best chance at peaceful resolutions? Question #2: What is the ultimate goal for the citizens of Palestine, if its not “The Palestinian’s are entitled to a state of their own with full economic and political power” – which comes from Bernie’s mouth a couple weeks ago. Question #3: If you are right, and Bernie has voted against the best interest of the Palestinian people in the past, is there any room for him to change his stance? If you answer “no” to the last question, then you will always feel defeated. With no hope in your heart to change people’s mind, I truly feel sorry for you. I love Palestine with all my heart, which is why I will vote for Bernie, the most peace-loving and human candidate. (Also, my activist-bred advice to your cause: choose your targets carefully, or you will loose supporters. If your cause is not pure, it will not succeed. There are a thousand better targets then Bernie Sanders, and you’re using his rise in popularity to get attention. I understand that, and probably would have used the strategy myself under different circumstances, if it werent for the simple fact that now you look like a Clinton tool. Is it possible for anyone to criticize Bernie without looking like a Clinton tool? The answer is no, not until (if) he wins the nomination. After he wins, by all means, go for it. But I expect, and will be looking for, a similar proclamation against Clinton or Biden)
Strange. Complaining about an American politician by people who were from countries who deny Christians and Jews the ability to practice their religion in those countries. This hypocritical attitude is absolutely brainless and shameful.
The only people refusing religious liberty in the ME are our AlCIAda thugs(And the other word soup boys)and Israel.
Where do you Zionists pull all these lies from,the sh*t protruding from your ears?
Because the United States is personally responsible for Israel, right Murtaza? Because some idiot who couldn’t shut up was screaming over Bernie’s response and a woman in the audience told the woman to shut up and he reiterated the point? Lazy, unprofessional journalism pushing a blatant agenda.
Without our support from its creation,Israel would not exist.
Lets be clear, Bernie did not specifically kick these people out, it was one of his low level staffers so stop talking about him like he kicked them out himself. Also, you have the nerve to mention that Bernie doesn’t accept dissenting views when the man spoke at Liberty University, one of the most religiously conservative colleges in the country! Bernie embraces civil discourse and opposing views. This author is writing with a clear bias and this article is utter propaganda. Murtaza Hussain should be ashamed for this trash “news”.
the reality is Bernies staffers represent him, what they do is what he does, that’s what representation is.
Bernie himself said that they shouldn’t have been kicked out, and now I’m hearing that it wasn’t even his stuff but the venue’s staff that kicked them out. This is just shit reporting.
@sam-WAAAAHHHHH! Stop your crying. Bernie will be okay.
Bernie, is full of himself. Claiming he wants to return America to its “free and brave” which was the natives , “land of the free” which was stolen from the natives and “democracy” which has proven by all America has done during Bush and Now Obama administration, it doesn’t mean squat. Having a dissent is removing the right for free speech and free expression. Seems something lately many ppl when voting have forgotten that when choosing their so called Prez.
Thanks for this, Murtaza. Something to be aware of, and something to watch going forward. In some ways Bernie is of that “get off my lawn” age. His staffers need to compensate by being more astute to the concerns of much younger voters. And, regardless of age of voter, we’re all too aware of, what turned out to be, Obama-Double-Speak. I have some real issues with Sanders’ stance on foreign policy to begin with. This incident only feeds the concerns I already have.
That said, I do think it would be in the best interests of this article to add an update and highlight Jeff Weaver’s comment below.
Bernie handles dissent rather well when it’s presented civilly. I’ll give you specific history — last month’s meeting at Liberty University. Bernie Sanders voluntarily entered an environment exceedingly hostile to some of his views and delivered perhaps the most exemplary performance for ANY political candidate to follow.
Even when it’s presented as an ambush, as in BLM, he let the speakers voice their grievances. But Bernie is very comfortable with CIVILIZED debate, not ambushes. Shouting down a speaker is not where we want to go intellectually, is it? Virtually every interview I’ve seen of Bernie Sanders, he acknowledges differences, he accepts differences and he states his case. Civilized, strong, effective.
Can we not pander to ambush tactics and rather promote CIVILIZED dialogue, a la Liberty University and the coming debates (Donald Trump excluded, of course LOL).
I did not question Sanders’ ability to handle dissent. And, in any case, nowhere do I get the sense that the folks with the sign were acting in a manner that was anything but civil. My concern with Sanders’ is his stance on foreign policy. US support to Israel and Israel’s apartheid response to Palestine are well within the realm of American foreign policy. That anodyne sign should not have been excluded, and the folks carrying that sign should have been included with the sign as Jeff Weaver indicates below. Regardless, to someone like me who already has doubts about Sanders’ foreign policy, this episode was not a mistake, it was not an error, it was a blunder. It was political malpractice.
All that said, excuse-me-but, fuck your notion of civility…
Mark A. Kleiman Sucks Giant Green Slimy Goat Balls; or, How To Talk To Motherfuckers Who Tolerate Indecency While Mewling About Incivility
Israel’s treatment of Palestinians, and US complicity in Israel’s endeavor is fucking indecent. So don’t be mewling to me about civility in the face of Bernie Sanders’ two-step shuffle on Israel and Palestine. Sanders has progressive positions on issues related to domestic policy that are less neoliberal than Clinton (which isn’t a difficult achievement), but his position on Israel-Palestine Sucks Giant Green Slimy Goat Balls. And, this incident with the sign only feeds the concern I already had. So, fuck off with your YAY-Bernie-Team-PomPoms.
Israel’s treatment of Palestinians, and US complicity in Israel’s endeavor is fucking indecent. So don’t be mewling to me about civility in the face of Bernie Sanders’ two-step shuffle on Israel and Palestine.
Thanks for that reminder from the past. And that Sadly, No post is bookmarked for future use.
I can’t help but remember how “incivil” Greenwald’s early writing was considered when he first started getting noticed in broader circles. In fact, I’d wager it was the single biggest complaint leveled at him in concerted efforts to distract from the message. Still is to a somewhat lesser degree.
One wonders what it takes before some people will allow their outrage to get beyond the limits of civility.
First off this is a total smear article devoid of any real context background research. Straight up high school rumor mill BS comparing sanders to GWB because of what someone said who wasn’t officiated with the campaign. And then to have the campaign speak out against what happen yet still publish an article with a title “Dissent is not allowed” Mr Hussain I mean lets be real here you have trump who is a clear unadulterated racist booting reporters out himself and then you decide to publish on this nonsense. If you were any good at doing investigatory research (which clearly you’re not) you’d know bernie sanders spoke out agains israeli’s attacks against the Palestinians (Bernie Sanders Condemns Israel’s “Reprehensible” Attacks on Palestinians, https://youtu.be/TocimL0AT1w)
I just watched the youtube video from 1988 which you promote and it clearly
shows that Bernie Sanders has been a hypocrite since at least that time.
He claimed then that he is independent,
but he encourages people to support Jesse Jackson
within the democrat machine..
What he said was “reprehensible” was “the sight of Israeli soldiers”
breaking the bones of Palestinians while he simultaneously
expressed strong devotion to Israel and a weaker stand on the “rights”
of the Palestinians.
He was trying to be in two places at once then
and he is trying to pretend that he can do that now (still)
by being a DNC supported candidate.
He and his supporters are delusional if they think that either
the democrat machinery
or the Israeli monstrosity it helps grow
will change because they feed it.
There is no “smear” in this article.
If anything, it is a glimpse into what his campaign is really about.
Clark, do you support a 2-state solution?
The word “nation” comes from the idea of being “born” into a tribe.
I do not support the dominant belief in nationality or religion.
Limiting people and nature into fake borders for human egotism are
the greatest falsehoods used to lead people to do the most
atrocious/vicious/horrifying actions against
all of nature.
Do we need more proof?
The creation of United Nations was, seemingly,
a step in the correct direction,
but it was used from the beginning as a tool for the benefit
of the most economically powerful and was guaranteed to
fail in its supposed mission by the creation of the “Security” Council.
At this late date, the vast majority of people are still
desperately
reinforcing the falsehood of various nationalisms
at the expense of their own species and the rest of the natural world.
When the UN has only one flag representing all of nature
(or, better yet – NO flag at all),
then we can talk about the “nation.”
These ideas about Israel, Palestine, and any other border disputes
are examples of how human feelings of insecurity, greed, and arrogance
are promoted as if they are a good basis for improving the
single global environment we all share.
Sure, a snowball in Hell has better chances of gaining momentum than
does what I am saying MUST happen.
I still prefer the truth.
so basically you’re a nihilist whose suggestion pose no immediate real world application. Gee thanks… while I
agree human beings are inherently tribal prone to conflict weeding those qualities through various tactics out
is going to take time. But abolishing sovereignty at least in the forceable future isn’t a plausible solution. Try
again. Actually it doesn’t make him a hypocrite. It means that in the specific conflict that he was referencing to,
Israel was wrong. You can simultaneously disagreeing with the launching of rockets into Israel by Palestinians
as well…
anyone else think putting spaces in your comment is kinda douchie?
Nihilism describes our leadership and Israel to a T,the most corrupt bunch of troglydytes to ever command so much power.
Despite the ZIOMedias terrible bias,we still see the absolute depravity of its deeply racist and paranoid citizenry,chasing Palestinians,and goading police to shoot innocents.Talk about an ugly bunch of criminals.
Destroying homes in collective punishment,time after time,with absolute silence from the scribes of hate.
Fair enough, I’ll assume then that the answer is no (but a much broader no). Sounds like you support a one-state (the global state) solution. I believe this view is grounded heavily in idealism and not realism. The reason I ask that question before I engage in any more debate on the issue, is I find that most people have an unrealistic view of the world or the Israel/Palestinian situation.
Personally, I find myself sympathizing with Palestinians while at the same time getting frustrated over their continued support of Hamas military wing, a group that murders its own citizens.
The only people executed by HAMAs are the quislings who inform for the Israelis which results in the deaths of Palestinians,a most logical response to traitors.
Yes, MY realism is not pragmatic to the vast majority of people
who have been trained to stay within the corporate system.
Just as my realism is to not support any corporate owned “pragmatist”
like Obama, Clinton, Trump, Bush,…… and yes, even someone who leads
people to think he is not a corporatist – like Sanders – while he
seeks to keep people within what is clearly a corporate driven party.
You dismissively call it “idealism” and as long as it is seen as such
nothing will improve.
Congratulations! You are in sync with the herd
which is running toward the cliff!
So these student activists didn’t know what Bernie’s position was? It’s clear he’s yet another zionist elected to a US gov’t position who holds the safety and security of a foreign gov’t on par with those who elected him.
In the end, all US Presidents and Presidential Candidates are virtually the same. They are the same personalities. I think freedom is always challenged and threatened by these people. It does not matter what the party or what their last name is… the US needs (the people need to demand) limits on gov officials. Viz. (just throwin ideas here):
• if you’ve served in any capacity in state or federal gov. more than 8 yrs you can’t serve the state or federal gov in any capacity at the close of that 8 yrs. Youre done.
If we really live in a democracy, then let someone else run that gov position.
We do not. or ever have lived in a democracy. the media is owned by those who have their own agendas. They want the world made in their own image.the ordinary man will believe what he is told to believe by those in power. The world for all of us is becoming more like the true man show . After 9/11
This is why I love American politics. As he did on so many issues, for years Obama has been telling us how he’d really like to do something about gun control, but gosh darnit, he’s only the president, he can’t do anything. Now Sanders and Clinton are vying to be the next president to reconcile their inaction with their promises.
Cut to today:
Hillary Clinton swears, cross her heart that should she become president, she’ll take “executive action”. To take the sensible, logical steps to regulate lethal devices who’s only purpose is mass killing of human beings.
So which is it? Is Obama a fraud, a liar? Or is Clinton, a former first lady, a former US senator, a former Cabinet secretary, lying when she says as president she can use executive action to do something about gun control?
http://www.wsj.com/articles/hillary-clintons-gun-control-proposals-to-include-executive-action-1444017603
This dynamic “poor me, I’m only the president, I can’t do anything, blame congress…oh, but reelect me, I’ll take executive action on my first day in office!” appears again and again across multiple issues. And the American press doesn’t seem to notice.
Nobody seems to get it. Whether Bernie favors normalization of US relations with the countries of the Middle East or not, he is running as a democrat, and the democrats as a whole are engaged in a race with the republicans to see who can be the most accommodating of the demands of Israel. Even if Sanders was in favor of a rational policy, his hands would be tied by his own party.
Anyone who wants to see fundamental improvements to US policy in the region needs to withdraw support from the democrat and republican parties. They are both so corrupt that is effectively impossible to reform them through dialog. Instead, support third party candidates at all levels – local to national. Perhaps when faced by an existential threat they will find the motivation to perform a critical evaluation of their positions.
Hillary is the big Israel ass kisser not Sanders
THAT must be why he has stated that he would support her if she gets the
nomination!
There’s the problem: people still think Bernie Sanders is a “viable presidential candidate.” The guy’s a complete crackpot. Proposing $18 TRILLION in new spending over the course of his first term? Are you insane? Seriously, I don’t care if you support Israel or Palestine or Martians, if you seriously believe in turning the USA into a failed European clusterf***, you need to abdicate your vote and stay home on election day. Please.
Dude… The people that told them to leave were not part of Bernie’s campaign. They worked for the venue.
Did you read the entire article? Sanders is no different from other members of his party in terms of support for the racist policies of Israel. The ejection of people from an event can be blamed on staff, but it is not staff that is casting votes in unquestioning support for Israel, even when that support is demonstrably at odds with the ostensible principles that the United States espouses.
Nice try, but this quote mostly undermines this hitpiece:
Two days after the students were ejected, a day after the group posted about the encounter on Facebook, a Sanders 2016 spokesperson acknowledged a campaign staffer was behind the ejection and that an error had been made. “What happened was a poor decision by a low-level staffer and doesn’t reflect campaign policy,” the spokesperson said.
But, like I said, good attempt to smear Sanders as a dictatorial Bush-like anti-progressive no Real Progressive should support.
Anyway, no, I’m not in lockstep with Sanders on I/P. And other issues, too. But he’s by far the best chance for spreading a real progressive politics in the US, win or lose. Might want to focus on that.
The trouble with Bernie is he’s a black man trapped in the rhetorical body of a white Obama… who was born w/ a silver tongue in his mouth.
*Of course, anyone can say they are going to close Gitmo … but it’s the closing of Gitmo that’s so important.
It’s an old article from 2006 Dissident Voice- but can anyone refute..?
“This summer, Sanders voted for House Resolution 921, which gave full support to Israel?s murderous war on Lebanon. He also voted for HR 4681 that imposed sanctions on the Palestinian Authority with the aim of removing the democratically elected Hamas government.
In response, longtime War Resisters League leader, David McReynolds sent a public letter to Sanders, stating, ?Because of your vote of support for the Israeli actions, I would hope any friends and contacts of mine would not send you funds, nor give you their votes.? Indeed, Sanders has consistently defended Israel through it worst crimes against Palestinians and Arabs. Unsurprisingly, some Sanders staffers have also worked with the American Israeli Political Action Committee (AIPAC) — including David Sirota, now a Democratic Party strategist, and Sanders? former communications director Joel Barkin.
Finally, in perhaps his worst betrayal yet, Sanders joined a host of liberal Democrats including Barbara Lee and John Conyers to vote for HR 282, the Iran Freedom Support Act — which bears a striking resemblance to the resolutions that set up the framework for the war on Iraq. The act stipulates that the U.S. should impose sanctions on Iran to prevent it from developing weapons of mass destruction and distributing them to aid international terrorism. It also calls for the U.S. to support democratic change in the country, thereby establishing all necessary pretexts for a war on Iran. Democrat Dennis Kucinich voted against the act and denounced it as a ?stepping stone to war.? “
i can refute your article.
first the war on Lebanon was with Hezbollah, a terrorist organization and Hamas is a democratically elected terrorist organization so the situation here is siding with Israel or siding with Hamas and Hezbollah…(<-the answer to this is important) do you support terrorist organizations?
same with the Iran resolution about imposing sanctions after the discovering of Iran buying military components for the nuclear program…do you support Iran developing nuclear weapons?
so basically the article you cited is superficial and out of context and "peace" does not mean hiding your head in the sand which seems to be the american progressive definition.
Israel practices state-terror and barely prosecutes its fanatical setter terrorists who maim and kill the people whose land they are stealing. Israel probably wouldn’t exist but for Jewish terrorists such as Menachem Begin and Yitzhak Shamir (who innovated the letter bomb). Those two terrorists — on wanted posters for terrorism — would be elected prime minister of Israel.
So. To support Israel is to support terrorists, past and present.
I would like a source please? All you have done is made statements without support. The article I provided , asking for refutation, clearly states bills supported by Sanders, people he keeps in close company and actual affiliations. Not made up / faked junk . To date there is not 1, I repeat not 1!! shred of actual, factual evidence to support your claim re Iran. As for Hamas and Hezbollah…. no I don’t think they are terrorists. I think they are an organization tasked with defending a people who are simply imprisoned.. see the Israeli fence as evidence as well as the blockaded Gaza strip. If I or you were treated as such , inevetiably we would also fight no? But they fight and they are termed terrorists? I call it basic human reaction to being imprisoned. Its time to toss the term terrorist and start asking why… what causes people to act and react and the answer is simple. Any animal or human under those circumstances will fight or flight. They choose fight..as I or any self respecting person would just like the founders of Israel… did they not bomb and kill to reach their goals?? Come back to humanity my friend.
Israel continues to be a forbidden subject for all American political candidates, from the extreme right to the extreme left. All politicians, either because of who they are, their ethnic or religious background, or because of their donor base , they are not willing ,or afraid to look like being critical of Israel. They can criticize God, Jesus, Islam, Catholicism, communism, ,Hinduism. Climate change, welfare, labor issues, health care, ….etc, they can argue and disagree on any of these topics, not so when it comes to Israel.
So maybe you need to enter in a serious negotiation with him.
According to information in comments below the intercept contacted the campaign and waited all day for a response. The 15 minutes after getting the response (they waited all day for) they published his hit piece which claimed there was no response from the campaign. Only after Bernie’s campaign manager came on here to point out that he spoke to the Intercept author 15 minutes before publication did they add an update, and it took 2 hours to add a vey short update without altering the article around it at all (in the digital age it takes 2 hours?).
This is really poor journalism folks. At best it’s laziness…rushing to publish the article in hand so you don’t have to now significantly edit its content and at worst its an attempt to protect a sensationalistic and in accurate piece of click bait when you realized that it’s status as such was in jeopardy. What I really can’t believe is that a publication associated with Glen Greewald would do this. A real shame.
When I worked on Jimmy Carter’s national press staff I witnessed a “low level staffer” slam Bob Schieffer against a wall because the staffer felt Schieffer was “intruding” on the candidate. We were mortified. This was certainly not campaign policy anymore than what happened in Boston with Bernie Sanders’ staffer was Sanders’ policy. Campaigns depend on hundreds of volunteers and “last minute” staffers and unpleasant mistakes happen. I would focus on the apology and the fact the Senator, unlike other candidates does not accept contributions from AIPAC.
Contrary to some posters here’ I found the article informative. Now I want you to imagine a US presidential hopeful gracing a stage wearing a pin depicting the national flag of say… Mexico while the stars and stripes is absent. Would we not question why ? Furthermore… when that pin is of the say the star of David or the flag of Israel do you question why ? You might.. just don’t try to ask publicly or a “low level staffer” ignorant to the goings on of national dialogue surrounding a real problem may remove you. Why would a low level staffer care? Because he/she is told to care. For those of you dismissing this article and the event it describes as “hijacking” should, plainly, be ashamed. Just one Canadians opinion on his big bro to the south becoming less than a shadow of itself. What happened to you America ? Your ppl had courage at one time to stand with and for the oppressed only to be bought off by the bully to keep your mouth shut.
We feel the Bern. As President , Sanders will be reasonable about Palestine, which means he will be supportive. Beware of authors who try to tar him unfairly when he has a nuanced approach.
A pro-Biden story and an anti-Sanders story on the same day, both lacking in substance.
What is going on, The Intercept? I hope it is just a co-incidence.
I think all you’ve avhieved here is you’ve described the sanders team preventing their event being hijacked.
You’ve not held up the “hijackers” and their position to much scrutiny, but you certainly seem to support them
You’re a “fearless” journalist: interview Bernie. Go on.
My compliments on such a creative piece produced from minimal unsubstantiated evidence. I think a blue fairy was also ejected from the event for too much fairy dust, someone told me that anyway.
Unsubstantiated? Well except for the videotape.
Mr. Hussein
“……Even Sanders’ support for a two-state solution to the Israel/Palestine conflict, which he progressively advocated before it became mainstream U.S. orthodoxy, now seems out of touch; a 2014 Brookings Institute poll found a majority of Americans favored a more radical one-state solution to the conflict, were a two-state solution to become unfeasible.……”
First of all, the two state solution is still perfectly feasible so Sanders is not out of touch at all. That is just YOUR opinion. On top of that, most Americans do not support imposing any economic sanctions on Israel under all circumstances by a 61-28% margin (same Brookings poll). So most Americans do not favor forcing Israel economically to establish a Palestinian state or force Israel into a one state solution.
It should also be noted that the largest funder of the Brookings Institute is the Qatari government (something you will never read in the Intercept for political reasons).
“……..The Qatari government was named by The New York Times as “the single biggest foreign donor to Brookings”, having reportedly made a $14.8 million, four-year contribution last year.[64] A former visiting fellow at a Brookings affiliate in Qatar reportedly said “he had been told during his job interview that he could not take positions critical of the Qatar government in papers”.[64] Brookings officials denied any connection between the views of their funders and their scholars work, citing reports that questioned the Qatari government’s education reform efforts and criticized its support of militants in Syria. However, Brookings officials also reportedly acknowledged that they meet with Qatari government officials regularly to discuss the center’s activities and budget, and that the former prime minister of Qatar currently serves on the center’s advisory board.[64]………”
Ethnic cleansing is criminal no matter who does it and for what reasons. There can be no justification for it. So it’ll be interesting to see if Bernie embraces the rule of law (international and moral) or will he become a zionist stooge.
of what ethnic cleansing are you talking about? and is there a legal definition of ethnic cleansing? it seems that your stooge need to read some books
Here’s a bit or reading for the minions that speak with a forked tongue.
“When we have settled the land, all the Arabs will be able to do about it will be to scurry around like drugged cockroaches in a bottle.” Raphael Eitan, Chief of Staff of the Israeli Defence Forces, New York Times, 14 April 1983.
“The thesis that the danger of genocide was hanging over us in June 1967 and that Israel was fighting for its physical existence is only bluff, which was born and developed after the war.” Israeli General Matityahu Peled, Ha’aretz, 19 March 1972.
David Ben Gurion (the first Israeli Prime Minister): “If I were an Arab leader, I would never sign an agreement with Israel. It is normal; we have taken their country. It is true God promised it to us, but how could that interest them? Our God is not theirs. There has been Anti – Semitism, the Nazis, Hitler, Auschwitz, but was that their fault ? They see but one thing: we have come and we have stolen their country. Why would they accept that?” Quoted by Nahum Goldmann in Le Paraddoxe Juif (The Jewish Paradox), pp121.
Ben Gurion also warned in 1948 : “We must do everything to insure they ( the Palestinians) never do return.” Assuring his fellow Zionists that Palestinians will never come back to their homes. “The old will die and the young will forget.”
“We have to kill all the Palestinians unless they are resigned to live here as slaves.” Chairman Heilbrun of the Committee for the Re-election of General Shlomo Lahat, the mayor of Tel Aviv, October 1983.
“We must do everything to ensure they [the Palestinian refugees] never do return” David Ben-Gurion, in his diary, 18 July 1948, quoted in Michael Bar Zohar’s Ben-Gurion: the Armed Prophet, Prentice-Hall, 1967, p. 157.
“We must use terror, assassination, intimidation, land confiscation, and the cutting of all social services to rid the Galilee of its Arab population.” Israel Koenig, “The Koenig Memorandum”
“Jewish villages were built in the place of Arab villages. You do not even know the names of these Arab villages, and I do not blame you because geography books no longer exist. Not only do the books not exist, the Arab villages are not there either. Nahlal arose in the place of Mahlul; Kibbutz Gvat in the place of Jibta; Kibbutz Sarid in the place of Huneifis; and Kefar Yehushua in the place of Tal al-Shuman. There is not a single place built in this country that did not have a former Arab population.” Moshe Dayan, address to the Technion, Haifa, reported in Haaretz, April 4, 1969.
Rabin’s description of the conquest of Lydda, after the completion of Plan Dalet. “We shall reduce the Arab population to a community of woodcutters and waiters” Uri Lubrani, PM Ben-Gurion’s special adviser on Arab Affairs, 1960. From “The Arabs in Israel” by Sabri Jiryas.
“Everybody has to move, run and grab as many hilltops as they can to enlarge the settlements because everything we take now will stay ours… Everything we don’t grab will go to them.” Ariel Sharon, Israeli Foreign Minister, addressing a meeting of militants from the extreme right-wing Tsomet Party, Agence France Presse, November 15, 1998.
“It is the duty of Israeli leaders to explain to public opinion, clearly and courageously, a certain number of facts that are forgotten with time. The first of these is that there is no Zionism,colonialization or Jewish State without the eviction of the Arabs and the expropriation of their lands.” Yoram Bar Porath, Yediot Aahronot, of 14 July 1972.
“Spirit the penniless population across the frontier by denying it employment… Both the process of expropriation and the removal of the poor must be carried out discreetly and circumspectly.” Theodore Herzl, founder of the World Zionist Organization, speaking of the Arabs of Palestine,Complete Diaries, June 12, 1895 entry.
Read more: EXAMPLES OF HATE SPEECH BY ISRAEL AGAINST PALESTINE | WHAT REALLY HAPPENED http://whatreallyhappened.com/WRHARTICLES/palestinians.php#ixzz3nnUBzhWK
You have some highly illuminating quotes there but it’s so lengthy folks will prolly scroll right on by. This one from Moshe Dayan is telling:
Dayan was a clear-eyed realist about what Zionists were doing to Palestinians which he understood would, of course, cause them to hate Zionists. Delivering a 1956 eulogy for a Jewish soldier a Gazan had killed, Dayan stated:
Just so. Except now the steel helmets are F-16s and white phosphorus.
Btw, one has to be very careful with quotes attributed to Zionist leaders. They do sometimes turn out to be bogus, and my credibility is important to me; I won’t cite especially something extreme unless I’ve checked it out.
There is at least one quote attributed to Begin at the link you give that strongly appears to be fake. So do have a care. Zionists actually have and do say and do atrocious things; there’s no need to make them up.
Mona
“……Btw, one has to be very careful with quotes attributed to Zionist leaders. They do sometimes turn out to be bogus, and my credibility is important to me….”
You damaged your credibility long ago with off the wall bigoted comments worthy of a poster at Stormfront.
Craig, if I had credibility with you I’d lack it with normal, decent people.
Homemade signs haven’t been allowed into any of Sander’s rallies – this is obviously an overreaction and therefore is not news.
Okay. This incident needed to be reported.
But I don’t believe there is any need to push Bernie Sanders into a corner. He didn’t eject anybody. His campaign acknowledged that a low lever staffer took the decision.
Yes the security was “aggressive.” so what? All security is “aggressive.” It doesn’t mean that Bernie staffers said, go be aggressive.
I’m not saying I’m with Bernie on this. But what I’m saying is that let’s try to partner with Bernie. Let’s not alienate him. This guy is going to be the next president of the US, no matter what the nature of the protests. So let’s make him a friend of the friends of The Intercept.
I’ve known of at least one Bernie rally which wasn’t allowing homemade Bernie signs. These protesters were told more than one time that they were welcome to join the rally, but that they could not do it with their sign. I’m really disappointed with The Intercept on this one.
Murtaza – your article would have some merit if it were not for: “What happened was a poor decision by a low-level staffer and doesn’t reflect campaign policy,” the spokesperson said. The whole premise for your article is bogus. I actually didn’t believe your premise at first, knowing Sanders. Then when I read the campaign’s response to the incident, I understood: “…poor decision by low-level staffer.” I give you credit for including the quote.
This incident is clearly an anomaly. Your comparison to Bush’s rallies only provides stark contrast to an approach that was ongoing and systematic. Sanders is NOT Bush by any means and I do not believe his campaign would ever conduct policies to remove any outspoken voices (of dissent or otherwise) from campaign rallies; unless of course they presented a security problem or physically disrupted the candidate from speaking.
Once you learned about the campaign’s response to this incident you should have changed the premise of your article.
Sanders’ support for Israel is not blind, but on a personal level it is strong, and justifiably so. He is Jewish and the son of a Holocaust survivor. On a political level, his support for the Jewish state reflects the long-standing interests of the US. There is no question here and no controversy either. I believe that whatever specific position Sanders takes on Palestinian statehood is based on years of careful analysis, reflection and consideration to all sides of the story. I would say the same thing about Sanders on every issue I’ve heard him address.
yet nevertheless articles like this continue to get published.. Its good to see people seeing through the rhetoric
Excuse me, stop spewing non sense, Bernie having trouble with young voters? Lol you must be old man, every damn college age kid I know voting for Bernie. All the college campuses I have been to, Bernie’s presence is oooge.
Plus Bernie’s position on middle East is well known. Two state solution for isreal and Palestinian, and have Arab countries deal with their damn problems.
And even if he is biased towards isreal, I don’t think American public see it as bad thing. After all usa is pro isreal first. So Bernie is actually doing great on this topic.
Lastly sorry to say Palestinian statehood is not really on progressive agenda at least near term( 20 years at least). So sorry buddy. You are wrong on every aspect of this article. Keep at it.
When Bernie Sanders got out of college he was drafted. He launched a bogus claim to be a conscientious objector and skipped off to Israel for several months. Is there any doubt as to what country he is loyal to? His phony claim was rejected. He appealed and appealed and appealed until he was beyond the draft age. Sanders is your cookie cutter Jewish Racist given a free pass by the media. If you are an American do not consider him a fellow citizen because he is not. He would not stand with you. He stands with Racist Israel first, last and always and he stands with it because it is Racist. Bernie Sanders is a Racist, a Jewish Racist.
Sanders is no racist. His support for Israel is lukewarm on the American political spectrum and were he not Jewish you would not have posted this. If you don’t like Israel or politicians who support Israel, why not go after Clinton, who is a far bigger hawk, or the entire Republican field? I know why.
Sounds like you’re the racist.
Bernie Sanders may be a bit too attached to Israel emotionally. But emotional attachment is nothing that cannot be corrected through proper reasoning.
There’s no wrong way to evade a draft. People did whatever they had to.
When the alternative is to commit murder, or to spend years of your life unjustly in a cell, what action can you call immoral?
Citizens are often required to do that which they personally find distasteful. There are taxes I find wrong. I pay them anyway. When faced with an important obligation Sanders lied and evaded. Further, he has since espoused contrary sentiments when such an obedience by others would benefit a foreign nation even when these sentiments seem to be at odds with the balance of his political philosophy. This dissonance raises a question as to where is loyalty lies and his fitness for office in the United States, most especially in an executive position. An open discussion of this should be had without name calling. Only then can an informed decision be made. In choosing the President no issue should be off the table. You are, of course, free to vote your pacifist beliefs. Others should be allowed to vote their principles fully informed.
Bernie Sanders is the ONLY candidate who has stood up against the abuse of Palestinians in the past. Keep in mind that Israel is our base in the Middle East. The money we give them in foreign aide is spent back into the United States on weaponry, so they are very much a part of our economy and our ONLY war allies in that part of the world. Still Bernie has stood up for them calling out support for Palestinians to have their own State. Here he is in 1988 https://youtu.be/TocimL0AT1w All American voters deserve representation but Bernie is not going to war so easily.
How disappointing to read this article about Mr Sanders he seemed to look and sounded like a kindly man who would represent the all people from all cultures even Palestinian peoples who have and still are suffering from the EVIL Beast 666 the unrecognized fake state ISRAEL
Only chumps hope for change with the duopoly.
Of course Sanders is in bed with the Israel lobby. All major candidates for federal office, regardless of political party, are vetted for their dedication to Israel’s policy of ethnic cleansing and lebensraum. Very few dissenters slip past the establishment gatekeepers.
Another reason I’ll never support Sanders is his support for “common sense” gun regulations, particularly a new “assault weapons” ban. Never mind that fewer Americans are killed each year by ANY kind of rifle than are beaten to death with fists and feet. And pay no attention to the fact that about five times as many Americans are killed with knives as with rifles each year. Let’s just make sure that only government enforcers have access to effective weaponry. We can trust our government, right?
If it were possible to remove all those modern firearms from civilian hands, it would be the final nail in the coffin for freedom in the US. It would be swiftly followed by strict speech laws and the rounding up of dissidents. As bad as the US government is today, widespread civilian ownership of firearms is the ONLY reason the oligarchy even pretends to care about our rights.
Some people never learn from history. In the 20th Century, the vast majority of murder victims (yes, excluding war casualties) were killed by their own governments. Anyone who thinks this can’t happen in the US is simply a fool. But an armed population can fight back. Just ask the people of Vietnam, Iraqi, and Afghanistan, who had nowhere near the numbers or firepower available to the American population.
Therefore, screw Sanders, Hillary Rotten Clinton, and any of the Republicans. They’re all competing to see who gets to be the Chief Puppet of the Israel lobby, the MIC, the Deep State, the private prisons lobby, and all the rest of the evil special interests who now rule the US. I’m going to either vote Libertarian or write in Edward Snowden’s name.
So… which candidate should people vote for?
Sensational B***S**T “journalism”. Not even worth the pixels it takes up on my screen. Pile of garbage article….
What “concerns us most” should most definitely be Sanders’ position on Israel/Palestine: it is insane. It accepts & defends that we carry out ethnic cleansing of the Palestinians. Ethnic cleansing is wrong.
While Israel’s treatment of Palestinians in the West Bank leaves a lot to be desired, you can hardly say that Israel is carrying out ethnic cleansing of Palestinians. Palestinians make up about 20 to 25 percent of The population of pre-1967 Israel, that is, they live in Israel proper and NOT in Gaza or The West Bank. They are Israeli citizens, all 1.5 to 2 million of them. Theoretically they have the same rights as other Israelis but in reality they face major obstacles to full equality. Nonetheless, what they face is a far cry from ethnic cleansing.
Bernie’s staff has disowned the volunteer that caused this. Let’s let Bernie make a statement before we give up on democracy.
Also feel that the title is very misleading considering how his campaign responded after learning of the events. I know a lot of progressives are stirred up so naturally they going to be protective of Sanders. thank being said It is my hope that Sanders Feel’s The Bern For Palestine and handles the topic with decorum and respect.
Ok… but an even more disturbing fact is that Bernie has not posted any foreign policy positions at all… Obama deja-vu ? Hope not…
This article infers that Bernie’s alleged intolerance of dissent can only be compared to the worst offender on this front: George W. Bush. The evidence? A low level staffer arbitrarily decided to tell a pro-Palestine group to put their sign away. The Sanders campaign immediately apologized and said it shouldn’t have happened. What a ridiculous article.
The title alone is completely overstated and misleading: one low level staffer screws up by telling a group of people to put their sign away or leave and that equals: ‘Dissent at Sanders event not allowed’? Give it a rest and find something real to criticize.
You’re talking about a guy who let dissenters—Black Lives Matter peeps in Seattle—take over his entire event before he even spoke. He’s been fielding adversarial questions throughout the campaign and throughout his entire political career. But allowing and tolerating other people’s views/criticisms is not the same as accepting and endorsing them, which of course he is under no obligation to do.
very good comment
Just a point of fact, Bernie didn’t “let” Black Lives Matter protesters “take over his rally.” He actually refused to engage them… and left. He didn’t complete the rally… refusing to speak after the incident.
What kind of BS is that?! Bernie repeatedly attempted to be cordial, and when he saw that the belligerent “activists” weren’t going to respond like adults, he moved to the side and let them prattle on….like children.
Except, that was not “his” event or a rally…he was a guest speaker there. Thanks.
He could’ve called security and had them removed, which is what every other presidential candidate in this election and in previous ones would’ve done.
Not cool, Bern.
You are supposed to be better than the traditional politicians. Silencing activists you disagree with sends the wrong message.
Read past the headline. A staffer had them removed. Sanders had nothing to do with it.
Sorry, this Intercept article still gets the polling data wrong despite the recent corrections that were made to the article. See my comment below:
https://theintercept.com/2015/10/05/dissent-on-israel-not-permitted-at-bernie-sanders-event/?comments=1#comment-169542
This article’s mistake about polls was partly fixed in Murtaza Hussain’s recent update, but only partly: the article still suggests the opposite of the truth. The new version of the article does correct the broken poll link, and the description of what the poll said has also been changed to focus on the hypothetical question of “What would you prefer if a two-state solution was not an option?”. Still, this article continues to make the false claim that Sanders’s support for a two-state solution “seems out of touch” with polling data. In fact, as the corrected poll link shows, the two-state solution that Sanders supports is the most popular option among American adults, and the one-state solution that Murtaza Hussain seems more inclined towards is less popular in the poll. Murtaza Hussain tries to describe Sanders’ support for a two-state solution as out of touch with American public opinion, but his article deliberately refuses to mention the actual polling data which shows, on the contrary, that Sanders’ two-state preference is what best fits public opinion in this country.
Maz should have added text stating the manifest reality that a 2-state solution is dead, so the majority of Americans would then support a 1-state solution. Sanders is knowledgeable enough on the topic to know that 2-state is dead with a stake through its heart.
When you come to the US or Canada as an immigrant you should be prepared to assimilate with our traditions and customs. Leave your old fights and politics at the door when you come in. DON’T BRING IT HERE.
Then that assimilation would be in Native customs. Eric have you assimilated to Native traditions and customs. You leave your intolerance and bigotry at the door. Canada and the USA is Native land, son. DON”T bring your hate here Eric.
shut it down
There is no democrat or republican in congress who will
criticize what the Israeli militants do to the Palestinians.
In fact, the congress has repeatedly unanimously endorsed
Israeli viciousness against the Palestinians.
Not one member of congress deserves a single vote.
Of Jewish descent and education, of course he will be the next servant of Israel! “THE AMERICAN PEOPLE ARE TIRED OF LIES” (Not to mention the USA’s being used as muscle and criminal executioner of Israel’s Zionist “DARK” agendas.
“Of Jewish descent and education.” Interesting. I’ve never seen the “and education” added. Murtaza is most likely of Muslim heritage. So what does that make him? What does it make Glenn Greenwald.
Seriously.
I mean, I think the simple question is “how many protest-ish signs were allowed at the ralley?”. If its zero, then I’m not even sure why this article was published. I’ve been reading the intercept a while now for honest, thorough reporting on underrepresented issues because I trust their reporting. I’m really not sure how this piece fits into their reporting credo…
This article is framed compare Bernie to Bush on unrelated issues, and, within that framework, paints Bernie as pro-Israel and suggests because of that he must not be that progressive….THEN HE YELLED AT SOMEONE! God save a progressive who yells at anyone.
It’s pretty obvious how this fits into TI’s reporting credo, but you don’t want to entertain the notion. Heaven forbid Bernie Sanders actually picking up some of the habits and mannerisms of the duopoly Establishment he pretty much joined when he decided to run as a Democrat; Excessively pro-Israel (taking a side in that conflict is counterproductive to peace), pro-military-industrial complex, spoiler theorist (blames Nader for what happened in 2000), and now apparently not very tolerant of dissent unless he approves of it.
If Bernie goes any further downhill or doesn’t win the nomination, there is a good alternative: Jill Stein of the Green Party. If enough of Bernie’s supporters were to vote for her in the above scenario (5% or more of the vote), the Green Party would become a major party nation wide and be well positioned to pressure the current ruling parties from the outside instead of trying to do so from the inside and invariably ending up being corrupted.
http://www.jill2016.com
Dr. Stein supports Palestinian human rights/ end to the siege of Gaza. Taking a position to defend the oppressed from the occupier is what is productive for peace. Otherwise you “side with the oppressor.”
Great article Mr. Hussain. While this is certainly disappointing, the actions of his campaign staff don’t reflect Bernie or his platform.
Bernie’s record on Palestine has been pretty promising. Not only was he the first Congressman to walk out on Bibi’s Congressional address, but he has also gone on-record to state “the Palestinian people, in my view, deserve a state of their own, they deserve an economy of their own, they deserve economic support from the people of this country.”
Given that supporting Palestine in any shape or form is still the premier fatal third rail for politicians, that’s pretty remarkable-or at the very least, that’s not nothing. Friends of Palestine deserve to give him a shot, as he is miles above the rest (including Hil-dawg).
funny because I have been removed from pro Palestinian bullshitfests simply for asking polite questions and refuting outright lies. you cant have it both ways.
Were the pro-Palestinians candidates for elected office and threw you, a citizen, out? Or were you obnoxiously spouting Zionist crap in a private venue unrelated to an election?
I support Bernie Sanders’s bid and I also support a one-state solution. I disagree with Bernie Sanders on Israel, but I also think the author of this piece is stretching too far to paint Sanders as intolerant of dissent.
What is your definition of a “one state solution?”
This looks more like an article from Hamas Weekly than the Intercept. anybody else find it humorous that Christianity and Islam both have global domination aspirations whereas Judaism wants that little strip of land and yet Christians and Muslims repeatedly dump on how greedy Jews are? As long as people keep believing in their made up religious nonsense there will not be a solution.
Please hasbara elsewhere. Thank you.
Oh, you wish to silence my opinion? Is this not the right place? Lol
Troll alert.
Less hasbara makes a better world. Hasbara is very, very annoying.
This is the place to have your opinion discarded rightfully as bullshit propaganda.
Your ever-so-reasonable response questions are an extension of your little skit.
Next will be the dismissal of the criticism you received as vicious slander.
Finally you’ll claim you are not being heard in good faith so you’ll not waste your time here.
hasbarat
Zionist Jews are at least as eager to control the world as anyone else. In fact, they’ve made a great deal of progress. Anyone with a brain can see that they’re clearly controlling the US political establishment (and hence the world’s most powerful military) as well as the mainstream media. Although Jews are only about two percent of the US population, extremely wealthy Zionist individuals (like Sheldon Adelson) and organizations (like AIPAC) account for a substantial fraction of campaign financing. This is why we’ve always see n Republicans and Democrats alike visiting the Wailing Wall and giving kiss-ass speeches to AIPAC in previous presidential elections. We’ll see the same thing in the upcoming election, too.
The power of Zionists in the US is such that the US invaded Iraq for the benefit of Israel — a key initial step in the agenda of the crypto-Zionist Project for a New American Century. This and other proof of the neocon agenda (which both major parties have adopted) is readily available on the Web.
Other overt and covert US aggression in the Middle East is similarly motivated. The most recent example is the CIA’s use of ISIS as a proxy army to overthrow Syria’s Assad and destabilize the region. And let’s not forget the saber-rattling toward Iran.
Zionist power in countries other than the US is also manifest. A prominent example is the criminalization of speech that Zionist Jews find offensive, such as questioning any aspects of the official Holocaust narrative. Of course, it’s perfectly acceptable in most of these countries to deny that the Armenian genocide ever occurred.
Bernie Sanders is the ONLY candidate who has stood up against the abuse of Palestinians in the past. Keep in mind that Israel is our base in the Middle East. The money we give them in foreign aide is spent back into the United States on weaponry, so they are very much a part of our economy and our ONLY war allies in that part of the world. Still Bernie has stood up for them calling out support for Palestinians to have their own State. Here he is in 1988 https://youtu.be/TocimL0AT1w All American voters deserve representation but Bernie is not going to war so easily.
Yep, Zionists want “that little strip of land”, which unfortunately already had people living on it, and they’ll kill anyone who stands in their way.
I have not believe in actions like of this of guys with Palestine signs. Recently secret FBI agents help palestinians to plot terrorist actions and after indicted they for terrorism. Who prepare this action on Bernie meeting? .
Israel-palestine conflict is covered by other conflicts with millions of killed in Afghanistan, Irak , Africa and now in Syria.
Pro-palestinian groups must to negotiate with Bernie in a base of interests of Palestine or in no coincidences to act in the best of their general interests. To interrupt a meeting in a crescent rally on democratic ways do not appear to be good for they.
Perhaps Robert would also like to apologize for the mistake? http://www.salon.com/2015/06/10/diane_rehms_massive_bernie_sanders_oops_npr_host_falls_for_anti_semitic_israeli_citizenship_hoax/
Diane Rehm’s daughter has a high paying job (well connected) working for NPR. An organization I stopped giving money to decades ago. NPR, and now PBS, funded by large corporations, and now, more and more, mouthpieces for them. Like NY Times, WaHoPo and CNN.
Read the post from Jeff Weaver below. It is important not to let the actions of a low level campaign volunteer interfere with the spirit of the Sanders position. Bernie dealt fairly well with BLM, and I think this article does him unfair harm, and furthermore, the content needs to be updated in regards to the Sanders campaign response. It is wrong to paint the campaign as being repressive off of this event, and then referring to Bernie attempting to speak through the screams of an angry heckler at a meeting to draw a picture of his stance on Palestine.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2K437Zd-gM0
I came here to post a comment (which is not something I tend to do on The Intercept), but you what you have said here is precisely what I would have liked to say. So, thank you.
I don’t want to accuse the author of having an anti-Sanders bias, but there does appear to be a slant that is not necessarily in favor of him or his policies that isn’t entirely grounded in fact.
Especially in regards to the BLM movement, Sanders has been nothing if not understanding aside from his initial reaction which was nothing other than confusion. If the author would visit Sanders campaign page, he would see that Bernie Sanders is a tremendous advocate for the rights of African-Americans, and is truly sympathetic to their plight. It’s a shame that such a comment (that bears no relevance to the topic at hand) would be made offhand to lend credibility to the idea that Bernie is not as good as he may seem.
born in NY USA bafoon. He does not have duel citizenship,, what is with these lying bigots on this BS thread . Even the Author has no fing idea what he is talking about regarding Sanders handling of BLM. Horrible writing of nonsense is all I get from this. Anyone taking any of it seriously needs to use fact check. This Author is obviously anti Israel. Look at his last name. Perhaps he can’t stand the thought of a Jew as president, and it shows in his fictional creative story telling here.
Bigots for Bernie speak out:
@jason – Get your facts right you idiot. Sanders is not practicing and does not have any love for Israel. Kudos to Sanders shutting down the vicious intolerant Palestinian supporters. They support murders and terrorists and clowns like you enable them. Go back in your hole.
You and jason, jeff, are flip sides of the same racist coin.
It is time for voters to grow up, and stop making heroes of politicians. They all lie, as do all governments. We need to force them to represent the citizenry, not the special interests, the corporations or the Israel lobby. That includes Sanders, Warren and whomever else, even the repulsive Hillary Clinton. I have voted for both Sanders and Warren (living in VT, MA and ME states). I have met and talked to Sanders at a dinner he threw in my town in VT when I lived there.
We have to stop with the “stand with Senator Warren”………. appeals and force them to stand with US. We have to apply extreme pressure now to hold to account the handful in Congress with any small semblance of conscience. As for me, when the elite Dems Obama, Kerry, Schumer, Feinstein and HRC declared Edward Snowden a coward and traitor, well, that was when the Dems lost me forever. I will now only vote third party or write in unless there is a clear Dem leader with a spine and integrity (none of the current ones, including Sanders, who is running as a stalking horse and has already declared that he will support the eventual Dem candidate (no matter how awful that one is) so he is not accused of being a “spoiler” or slitting the vote.
To that I have to say, any mainstream Dem nominated for POTUS race is a spoiler for me, and as to splitting the vote, well, it is OUR vote, it doesn’t belong to the Dems, therefore, it cannot be split. Most likely I will vote for Dr. Jill Stein, Greens, again, or write in Snowden–Manning.
” and as to splitting the vote, well, it is OUR vote, it doesn’t belong to the Dems, therefore, it cannot be split.”
Amen there. Glad to see someone who understands that. It came naturally to m, it should be common sense to anyone who believes strongly in democratic elections and free speech, yet so few actually recognize it as such. It’s no wonder our country is growing more and more authoritarian with each election. The corrupt Democrats and Republicans think they can get away with almost anything because of this lack of voter spine and reason.
I’m also almost certainly going to be voting for Jill Stein at this point, unless we can’t get her on the ballot next year here in Illinois. But I think we will.
Waits WHEN and WHERE did Bernie Sanders declare that hebwas merely a stalking horse, and would bow out to any eventual dem candidate? That’s a pretty big claim, and needs more than the words of Mr Random Comment Guy to back it.
(BTW, Lawrence Lessig is apparently running, as well.)
They were not singled out. Only official campaign signs were allowed, which the staff provided.
That’s not what Jeff Weaver, Bernie’s campaign manager, has said here in comments. Namely, that the sign was fine and they should have let it in.
Bernie is a US citizen only so I’m sure you’re not talking about him.
Twitter:
See. I was would I said I was.
Regards
Jeff
You were indeed. But I’m sure you know that people can be anything they want online. ;)
Oooooooh, it was just a mistaaake that that one group holding that one banner got ejected! Gotcha.
“Already, Sanders has been criticized for his handling of Black Lives Matter protesters at his events. ” As far as I can recall, there was only one instance when Bernie was heckled by BLM activists after which he let them speak and that was during a social security celebration in Seattle. That was not his event and he was just one of the speakers. Please correct your facts before publishing your work. Interestingly, his criminal justice platform has been touted by BLM leaders like Deray as the most comprehensive compared to that of the other candidates.
Bernie handled BLM with grace and kindness, much more so than ANY other candidate would have or has . Your post is very misleading. Bernie Sanders was gracious and gentle and did not force anything with BLM. Fix your post its complete BS that he handled BLM with anything less than grace.
It was a couple of times… http://www.politico.com/story/2015/08/bernie-sanders-2016-black-lives-matter-problem-121236
Can I see the sign?
Here’s a photo of the sign: https://www.facebook.com/WillYaFeelTheBern4Palestine/photos/pb.903403253073205.-2207520000.1444102129./903404899739707/?type=3&theater
And here’s the video of them being made to leave: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kohmRsIF4Hc&feature=youtu.be
Bernie Sanders is the ONLY candidate who has stood up against the abuse of Palestinians in the past. Keep in mind that Israel is our base in the Middle East. The money we give them in foreign aide is spent back into the United States on weaponry, so they are very much a part of our economy and our ONLY war allies in that part of the world. Still Bernie has stood up for them calling out support for Palestinians to have their own State. Here he is in 1988 https://youtu.be/TocimL0AT1w All American voters deserve representation but Bernie is not going to war so easily.
so they are very much a part of our economy and our ONLY war allies in that part of the world.
I beg to differ, as would many Yemenis.
http://www.theguardian.com/world/2015/apr/08/us-arms-deliveries-saudi-coalition-yemen-aden
Precision-guided, as opposed to those notoriously inaccurate AC-130 gunships responsible for destroying the MSF hospital in Afghanistan.
Most progressives now understand that the Middle East is key to the US empire and supporting Israel advances this goal. Just as they understand that the key to future prosperity is increasing the wealth of the 1%. The state cannot act in the interests of the marginalized unless it first ensures its own prosperity. Just as on a plane, they advise you to put on your own oxygen mask, before assisting anyone else.
As one Jewish-American guy told me in a party in NYC last year, in a conversation regarding the bombing of Palestine… “The way I see it, that’s the price of our privilege.”
This hit piece is nonsense and the author needs to at least do his research. Incase you didn’t know Bernie is a Jew. Did you get that, he’s a Jew. And not just any Jew he’s a Jew who lost many of his family members to the Nazis. And even after all that the man doesn’t just tow the pro-israel line. He support the Jewish people but he has issues with the government. This is article gives a better understanding of what Bernie think.
http://www.salon.com/2015/06/16/bernie_sanders_im_not_a_great_fan_of_benjamin_netanyahu_partner/
And here is an article where Bernie Sanders stands alone in boycotting adress
http://www.salon.com/2015/06/16/bernie_sanders_im_not_a_great_fan_of_benjamin_netanyahu_partner/
And I am a Millennial and even I find the one state idea crazy. But even more crazy is you expect to here it from a guy who lost his family to people with different ideologies. And make no mistake Israel and Palestine have very different ideologies. You want to bash on the guy because if what you want, but you have never even taken the time to think about the man’s feelings. And I have never seen any other signs at Bernie’s rallies so let’s keep it that way.
Jesus on a crutch, Bernie Sanders is not running for best patient in therapy. He’s running for president of the United States. Citizens who advocate for the oppressed Palestinians “living” in an apartheid state — and suffering semi-regular obliteration and brutal annihilation by Israel — deserve to have their views made known to candidates.
Make your views but don’t try to bring the man down. And it doesn’t matter what you want to say, this is a personal issue for him. Heck he’s even better that most politicians on this who went through what his family did. Just like it’s a personal issue for the author it seems because he went through a lot of trouble to try and paint the main into a corner. You are not going to win any support if you keep going down this road. It’s not a black and white issue and there is more than enough information about Bernie to know that this piece is bullshit.
If it’s that much of a personal issue, he shouldn’t be running for the highest political office in the country, dumbass.
So a person who runs a country shouldn’t have personal issues? incredible. And yet at the same time you want a person who cares about issues? Oh I see. Seems legit
I’m sorry, but you are truly stupid. If you want to support Bernie Sanders, shut up.
Your entire premise would disqualify Bernie Sanders from being president. But I doubt the man is so driven by personal pain that he could not conduct fair and rational foreign policy.
You, sir, are just the worst advocate.
Him being Jewish is not the issue. He needs to be able to look at this conflict for what it is: one of oppression and apartheid. If he can’t, he shouldn’t be running for President as a “progressive” and pretending to be different from the status quo. Millions of Palestinians were ethnically cleansed from their lands and had to pay for the crimes of the Nazis. They continue to have their lands stolen, homes/farms etc. destroyed. They have horrible abuses and human rights violations poured down on them daily by the Israeli military and extremist settlers who harass them with the full protection of the government. If you’re using your Jewish identity to apologize for Israel’s psychopathy and constant violence towards Palestinians, you should probably seek therapy.
In what world does what the Nazis did to the Jews in Europe absolve the Zionist genocide of Palestinians?
In what world does that absolve censorship by the staff of a U. S. presidential candidate?
“Oh oh ohm,don’t pick on Bernie, his family was killed in Nazi Germany”.
If Bernie can’t be “picked on” for any reason, he should stop running for political office.
This is Bernie’s campaign manager. This was done by a low level staffer and a volunteer without authorization. The staffer has now been banned from working future events. The sign in question was appropriate and in the spirit of many of the other signs there. I have talked personally with the people excluded and expressed my regrets about this happening. When I talked with the reporter he said the story had not gone up yet and he said this information would be included but somehow it was not. Admittedly it was later in the day so maybe he just decided to let it run in its current form without update. Other event staff are being informed about this and instructed to ensure this doesn’t happen again. Hope that clears things up.
If you are who you say you are that’s very encouraging. Perhaps the editor put this up too early? We’ll see what Maz has to say.
Thank you for clarifying. I wish the author would do more to state all of the facts instead of just trying to turn people against Bernie’s campaign. Had I not read the comments, I never would have seen this.
Once again, thanks Jeff.
Murtaza Hussain, step it up and do some honest and complete journalism.
Or maybe Sanders should step it up and be a more honest and complete candidate.
“Jeff Weaver” writes: “The sign in question was appropriate and in the spirit of many of the other signs there.”
So how critical of Sanders does a sign have to be before it is not “in the spirit of” other signs and not “appropriate”? The scandalous way that George W. Bush’s campaign treated displays of criticism (as Murtaza Hussain’s article mentioned) involved people expressing views that were not at all “in the spirit of” the Bush supporters at Bush’s rallies.
I see some interesting discrepancies — “Jeff Weaver” claims that only two low-level people were involved in what was said to the Students for Justice in Palestine sign-holders, while Murtaza Hussain’s article implies that more than two people approved or had a part in trying to suppress the SJP message. And “Jeff Weaver” says he was told info would be included in the article, but the article as published says that the Sanders campaign never responded. Hmm. I too would like to see what Murtaza Hussain says, even if these are minor discrepancies. But the main issue is that “Jeff Weaver”‘s comment definitely falls short of repudiating Bush-style suppression of critical messages.
If you indeed are Jeff Weaver, bravo! I am 71 years old and I have not seen a campaign like this in my lifetime. And it has inspired me to do what I can to help him get elected. What a shame that most voters across the political spectrum do not know the buried by the media (and our schools) history of corporatism as found at http://GangsOfAmerica.com. If they did, so much of what Bernie believes and fights for would appeal to an even larger percent of the 99%, so many of who are getting betrayed by those they think they need to trust.
Well this begs the question: why did Maz go to print without talking to you? Very disappointing from the Intercept, which I highly enjoy. Seems like a huge mistake to me…..
They did talk to the campaign. The article says so. The author has tweeted he’s now heard from Jeff and will be updating the article. It went up before that conversation.
They were contacted this morning, we held the story basically all day awaiting response. They got back to us tonight right around the time the story went up. We’ve added their comment.
Not to split hairs but in the interest of full disclosure I spoke with the author some 15 minutes before the article went up. Plenty of time in the digital age to add the full information provided. And once it was up it took over 2 hours to add even the skeletal update provided.
Don’t know enough of the details about what went on behind the scenes, but one thing is for certain, the update is not only skeletal, but it’s posted only at the bottom of the article. There should be a notice in bold at the the top of the article: Update.
@Jeff Weaver – Thanks for repudiating this ill-begotten decision. I have resumed my automatic monthly Sanders campaign contributions. Now, please, lets get in front of this gun control issue. @Ryan Tate & @Murtaza Hussain – Much as I hate to see Sanders called into question, this reporting was important and consistent with what I expect from The Intercept. However out fairness, I’d like to see the repudiation move to a sub-head position under the title. Otherwise, the article continues to perpetuate an incorrect portrayal of the facts.
Hi Jeff,
I don’t know how likely you are to see this comment, but I just wanted to say that I really hope Bernie has read Rob Reich’s July 14 article about Hillary Clinton and Wall Street.
http://robertreich.org/post/124114229225
Glass-Steagall will come up at some point in the debates, and it’s very important that Bernie is ready to debunk Hillary’s claims when she says that the recession had nothing to do with Glass-Steagall because Lehman Brothers and Bear Stearns were not commercial banks.
There is no picture of the sign on this article and/or any article. It is not shown in the video either. How am I supposed to believe its not like something with profanity on it?
Yeah Bernie!
Intercept biased, pro Zion.
Free Palatine!
World’s biggest prison.
Meh. I disapprove of Bernie’s posture towards Israel. Part of it is probably calculation : he knows he’ll be viciously attacked by the Israel lobby as a “self-hating Jew” if he walks too far out of line, and it’s a divisive issue that’s tangential to his attempt to unify various segments of the American electorate under a new economic consensus. That sort of tunnel-vision has been frustrating every flavor of single-issue activist/voter since day one.
However, I think what this little episode represents is the campaign’s fear of a repeat of the unsightly BLM incident (or even the 2014 “shut up” incident). Let’s not forget what happened to Howard Dean. Bernie Sanders has been identified as a serious threat by the establishment and if even ONE drop of blood gets into the water, his candidacy could be devoured in the consequent feeding frenzy.
I don’t really find significant fault with the campaign being careful not to get hijacked or torpedoed. That’s not the same thing as being intolerant of dissenting viewpoints; it’s a reflection of the Twitter-powered, sound-byte fueled political culture of the United States.
After 2nd reading and update of article, Intercept is fair and objective.
My decision to vote 3rd party again came after Sanders said Israel’s massacre of Palestinians last summer was simply an “overreaction”. That decision was cemented when he said Saudi Arabia should be put in charge of fighting ISIS and sorting out the ME (I urge everyone to watch Abby Martin’s latest Telesur episode on SA…http://youtu.be/rezvemRMelQ). Then the point of no return was when he recently said he supports US air strikes on Syria and regime change. The guy’s just another warmongering centrist who supports or will go along with the status quo. I can’t believe people actually call him a “leftist” and “radical.” Nothing will change with him. He may be genuine about wanting economic change for average Americans, but quite frankly, that means absolutely nothing when you support the imperialist barbarity of this country and disgusting “allies” like Saudi Arabia and Israel.
A Wikileaks cable recently released showed that the US government was supporting the planned assassination of Bolivia’s leftist Evo Morales (which Bolivia is now investigating). We keep funding and supporting right-wing oppositions in Bolivia, Venezuela, Argentina, etc. We’ve destroyed Honduras, which Hillary Clinton helped achieve and proudly patted herself on the back for in her book. We ousted the democratically elected government of Ukraine in a coup we helped orchestrate and brought into power fascist right wingers -some of whom proudly and openly call themselves neo-Nazis – and put ethnic Russians in eastern Ukraine, including Jews and Muslims, in grave danger. We bomb to smithereens and overthrow the secular governments of any Muslim ME country that seeks independence from neoliberalism and the US-Saudi-Israeli shit storm.
Bernie Sanders won’t change any of that. He doesn’t care.
Actually, even Chris Hedges believes “achieving economic change for average Americans” is the first step to wining support for ending the wars. Bernie cannot confront the Imperialistic status quo head on. Let him do one thing at a time. Bernie does care, that much is quite obvious.
Hedges doesn’t support Sanders’ candidacy at all. In the following article he tells why. Then at the radio segment he tells why, specifically.
Where is our Jeremy Corbyn?–Chris Hedges
Radio Segment
This article is a hit piece in all but name. I hope the author is willing to correct many errors in this article.
1. In the town meeting where Sanders said “excuse me, shut up” (which was a few years ago, NOT a campaign event) he was being barraged by screaming audience members who would barely let him speak and explain his views.
2. Bernie is middle of the road.https://berniesanders.com/issues/war-and-peace/
He is clear in condemning both sides for wrongs they are done as well as supporting both sides for wrongs done to them. On the most complicated international issue for the last few decades, it is necessary to start discussion from the middle and try and bring everyone there. Only then can progress be made. He doesn’t support settlements like this article falsely claims.
3. Bernie wasn’t a part of the unanimous vote in support of Protective Edge. He obtained from it, and even then, the process for supporting it was so confusing that it was never technically unanimous. Plus, Bernie has made it clear Isreal’s actions during said war were wrong (as shown in the issues page on his site above.)
4. You need to reach out strongly to the Sanders campaign to get a statement to explain the situation. as someone who was worked his rallies, having big banners of ANY SUBJECT such as the one the activists were using isn’t permitted. Plus, it is not as if Bernie told his people to do this. He was on stage for goodness sakes! He has shown in Seattle during the BLM he is able to stand to the side and let people speak their minds. Then after that, he made huge strides in terms of outreach, creating the strong racial justice platform as shown on the Camapign Zero website and has had numerous discussions with BLM.
I’m sad to see an article riddled with this many errors made it onto the Intercept. I hope you correct the article with the facts.
Bernie Sanders told pro-Palestinian activists to “shit-up” last year — not “a few years ago.”
I see nothing about settlements in the article.
Finally, I agree Maz should reword the unanimous consent vote sentence. Sanders merely allowed the resolution to pass unanimously. He did not sign on to it.
The article is not “riddled with errors.” Except for the clarification of the Senate vote, and a wrong link embedded in the Brookings poll (a non-substantive error), it is accurate.
Oh geez, Freudian slip? He didn’t say “shit-up.” It was “shUt-up.”
I recently came across a religious perspective called “omnism”, it is one where a person looks for some truth or truths in every religion, rather than seeking and holding onto the one true religion. In a similar way, I seem to have of late become an omnist politically, such that I try to see truths in all sides of every political bebate and issue. That said, I find Jack0’s critic to be even-handed, otoh I can see the outrage of some of those who want to break the rules governing a rally to make some important point. What a shame that this age of corporatism-engendered “divide and distract in order to conquer” works so well, and more and more so. Especially as I intuit that just about all of the opinions stated here are by quite decent people. Plus, for what it is worth, I am inclined to think that Senator Sanders too has a good soul, and is doing his best to help resolve perhaps insoluble problems. So God help us all, and even if you do not believe in one. Because unless more of us at every level do more to agree to disagree, all of us and our posterities are screwed. -(
You better watch the video of Bernie yelling at a voter to ‘shut up, shut up” in his best Chris Christie impersonation again. He was out of line. He was trying to put forward Netanyahu’s line about Gaza, and not succeeding, because the audience was not under the same Israel lobby pressure that Sanders must be. Too bad. Stand up for right. The main issue is NOT as Warren and Sanders say, economic inequality. It is the wholesale violation of our civil and human rights, and others in the rest of the world, by an out of control fascist government. I am very low income, but the lose of my privacy and legal rights is more distressing than being low income. I’m not dismissing economic inequality as a serious problem, but the undermining of the whole democracy that once, sort of existed, as well as the rule of law, is more concerning to me. And I will be voting third party–again. And most likely for a woman, yes! Dr. Jill Stein, Green Party.
The democrats are republicans who pretend to be opposed to the
republican party.
The worst things about the Sanders campaign is that it will
( 1 ) be given the money which might have gone to build the Green Party and
( 2 ) it will leave these young people feeling cynical when they realize
he is not a real opposition candidate.
If Sanders was legit
he wouldn’t be running as a democrat.
The democrats suck the energy out of (what might be called) the left
and then they
suck some more.
If he were not running as a Democrat, he would not be contributing to the Democratic Party perhaps returning to its FDR and Harry Truman days. Plus beginning to pull in here and there Teddy R anti-corporatist Libertarian & Republicans.
Ah yes, The good ol’ days
when the democrats threw out Henry Wallace and began
making the Pentagon and weapons manufacturers the most prominent
agents of foreign policy.
It is absurd to think that Sanders or anyone else is going to turn
the democrat party into something beyond a corporate owned
group of lying militarists by joining the party.
But hey, I’m a fool for even thinking about it.
“One state solution” is a contradiction in terms.
REALLY, in what version of reality do people think that Arabs and Jews can co-exist peaceably in one state?
I mean, for real, Sunnis and Shias can’t even co-exist in a single state.!
There already is a 1-state. An apartheid state. Ending the apartheid is the solution.
This Mona seems like a real “see you next Tuesday”
Too much hyperbole and exaggeration on her part. The world needs more thinkers and less people like her
Arabs and Jews have coexisted peacefully in many countries for centuries until the Zionist poison emerged about a century ago. Take a look at the writing of Naim Giladi – an Iraqi Jew who talked about how Zionists would come to Iraq and bomb Jewish homes and businesses to convince Jews there they were unsafe. Jewish Iraqis has very prosperous lives in Iraq and when the Zionists couldn’t convince them to go to Israel, they’d resort to terrorism.
Read a book, dumbass. Shias, about 15% of the Muslim world, have historically been victims of persecution. So yes there’s always been some tension. But you can thank Saudi Arabia and their Wahhabism – a one hundred year old, formerly fringe sect of Islam (which influenced ISIS) that’s been nourished by the West because it supports capitalism – for the violence we see today.
Interesting about Wahhabism being only about 100 years old. Zionism is also a political and opportunistic movement that is only about 130 years old.
Ah, I get it.
Part 1: It’s the evil, evil Zionists, who in the mid-nineteenth century, when nationalism raged among all the ethnic groups of the world, had the audacity to pursue it as well. And yes, in Palestine, in the Middle East, where they had a root or two (as your otherwise too specious to mention Iraq example supports).
Part 2: Oh what a Shangri-La the Middle East would be if not for the West!
This kind of thinking is very bad. It’s bad for many reason too numerous to go into in this space.
But it’s most bad because it obscures what’s really at issue here: an illiberal Arab and Iranian culture that does not afford or value things I imagine you take for granted: free speech, right to assemble, fair and regular elections, free press, gay rights, women’s rights, religious freedom, equal opportunity, educational opportunities, economic opportunities.
And I know that the intellectual soil this site grows from believes the West does not have these things either. But I guarantee that 99% of those who believe this do not live in the Arab Middle East or Iran.
The “shut up” incident was from 2014, before the presidential campaign started, as can be confirmed by clicking the link provided.
This was a campaign rally, not a town hall or Q &A
So uh, you think a candidate for president of the FUCKING UNTIED STATES properly prohibits citizens of certain viewpoints from his events. I see.
Do you understand what a rally is?
noun, plural rallies.
a drawing or coming together of persons, as for common action, as in a mass meeting:
There is a time and a place. Disingenuous to attend a rally with perpendicular intentions. That’s called trolling.
Oh please. Trolling? This was not a comments section at HuffPo. It was a campaign event for citizens to hear the candidate for president of the United States. And that candidate decided citizens holding a perfectly civil sign would be prohibited because the Sanders campaign doesn’t like that particular viewpoint. It’s most disturbing.
show me the sign.
1. Are you unfamiliar with Google?
2. A “Jeff Weaver” purporting to be Sanders’ campaign manager has just commented here and said the sign was fine and the citizens should have been allowed in with it. https://theintercept.com/2015/10/05/dissent-on-israel-not-permitted-at-bernie-sanders-event/?comments=1#comment-169442
1. Are you looking to communicate or not? LMGTFY? Why don’t you just link to it so we can move on – there’s only about a billion pictures on google.
2. Yes – fine…if that’s him, that’s a great response…and if so, your response was just as off-base as my own…with the added ‘value’ of vulgarity. What’s your point?
Are you going to turn on a dime now that this happened?
Turn on a dime? I find you very condescending, so this will be my last post.
I am happy to be wrong, when the right answer is a better answer. I don’t argue for sport.
Sure thing Derek. You announced the pro-Palestinian citizens were “trolls.” Oh, but: “I don’t argue for sport.” And now decide the “better answer” is that they are not trolls after all because the campaign has said they should have been let in. You are behaving like a hack.
Apparently you did not see this:::
Jeff Weaver
Oct. 5 2015, 10:57 p.m.
This is Bernie’s campaign manager. This was done by a low level staffer and a volunteer without authorization. The staffer has now been banned from working future events. The sign in question was appropriate and in the spirit of many of the other signs there. I have talked personally with the people excluded and expressed my regrets about this happening. When I talked with the reporter he said the story had not gone up yet and he said this information would be included but somehow it was not. Admittedly it was later in the day so maybe he just decided to let it run in its current form without update. Other event staff are being informed about this and instructed to ensure this doesn’t happen again. Hope that clears things up.
Did you ask the Sanders party for a response? Nice hit job. And I thought the intercept was about valid information not disinformation . Shame. I’ll be very cautious reading any further on this site.
uh.
`The Sanders campaign did not respond to a request for comment about the incident.`
Jonathonp doesn’t need to “be very cautious reading any further on this site.” He needs to be cautious reading!
Edit: For people not familiar, large multi-person banners are not generally allowed at campaign rallies. You can hold your giant sign outside of it but they are generally not permitted inside the rally. Exactly what happened here. #feelthebern
The sanders campaign was never contacted
Did they tell you they weren’t contacted? The article here notes they were contacted, but declined to comment. Are you calling this reporter liar?
The author says they were contacted.
This article falsely represents American opinion on the “one-state solution”, with a link that doesn’t say what you claim it does. You say that you’re linking to a 2014 Brookings poll that shows a majority of Americans supporting the one-state solution to the Israeli-Palestinian issue. But the link you provide goes to a different poll which doesn’t even address that topic. The 2014 Brookings poll on the one-state solution can be found at a different link, but the poll shows the opposite of what you claim:
http://www.brookings.edu/~/media/Research/Files/Reports/2014/12/05-american-opinion-poll-israeli-palestinian-conflict-telhami/israel_palestine_key_findings_telhami_FINAL.pdf?la=en
This is clearly the 2014 Brookings poll you mentioned, but what it says is that MORE American adults support a two-state solution than a one-state solution, and neither option has majority support. 39% supported a two-state solution, 34% supported a one-state solution, 14% supported continuing the occupation, 8% supported Israeli annexation without equal citizenship for Palestinians, and 4% refused to answer.
The poll did show a majority of American adults willing to support a one-state solution “if a two-state solution is not an option”, but that shouldn’t be taken out of context: the only way the poll shows a majority of Americans supporting a one-state solution is under hypothetical conditions where a two-state solution is ruled out, and the poll actually showed people preferring a two-state solution to a one-state solution.
You also don’t address the serious practical problem with a one-state solution: it’s beyond question that many Jewish Israelis violently hate Palestinians as a group and vice versa, and if the two communities had to live together in one state, many Jewish Israelis and many Palestinians would consider it their obligation to kill members of the other group until their own group ended up on top. For this reason, some sensible people who hope for a democratic one-state solution in the long run recognize that we may be able to get there only by starting with a two-state approach and hoping that tensions eventually reduce to the point where unification of the two states is possible.
The idea that a harmonious one-state solution can be achieved in the foreseeable future (perhaps by nonviolent methods like BDS) is an idea that has been pushed by Palestinian political figures like Omar Barghouti. And I think it’s worth looking at why this idea was appealing. To a sizeable chunk of the Palestinian community, it’s appealing to hear that you will soon become part of a peaceful, harmonious, non-oppressive unified state which includes all historical Palestinian land with Jews and Palestinians as equals, and that this perhaps can even be achieved nonviolently. Not all Palestinians agree with this of course, but it’s easy to see why this kind of political message is appealing to a sizeable chunk of the Palestinian community given the terrible conditions they live under and the lack of success of other approaches. So it’s no surprise that you can find political figures like Barghouti promoting this sunny message, gaining popularity from it, and pushing it forward as a program. And some in the West who care about Palestinians also support this idea, partly because they prefer to back ideas that have some support among Palestinians, and partly because they like the rosy nature of the concept. But let’s be clear: the one-state solution has gained the popularity it has, not because of its practicality, but because it’s a message that’s well-designed to gain support from a sizeable number of Palestinians. The fact that it sounds nice and is a reasonably successful message for political figures to use in Palestine shouldn’t blind us to the practical obstacles it faces. And the biggest obstacle is the fact that hatred and the inclination to use lethal violence are still very strong motivations among many Israelis and among some other Palestinians. Even apart from that, resistance from Israel, the United States and other governments is itself a strong obstacle. So as a practical matter, the one-state solution isn’t anywhere near as plausible as a two-state solution for now.
Maz embedded the wrong link, but otherwise your criticism is meritless. A 2-state solution is no longer possible due to settlements; there is wholly insufficient land left for a Palestinian state. The poll shows that a majority of Americans endorse a 1-state solution if what has happened occurs.
As for this:
So what? The article isn’t about that per se. It’s tangential to Bernie Sanders’ outrageous prohibition of certain citizens from his campaign event.
Finally, given that there already is a de facto 1-state — an apartheid state — in existence, justice demands an end to the apartheid. Hence, BDS.
Okay, so you think it doesn’t matter when a journalist at the Intercept makes the mistake of claiming a poll said the opposite of what it said. On the contrary, I respect the Intercept precisely because they rarely make these kinds of mistakes and usually correct them when they do.
About the poll, the issue we’re discussing is whether a majority of American adults prefer the one-state solution or other approaches like a two-state solution, continued occupation, etc.. One part of the poll actually asked that question directly, and that’s the part that I emphasized in addressing that issue. The part of the poll that you appeal to didn’t actually ask about that question, but addressed a different issue phrased in hypothetical form: it asked Americans what option they would support if the two-state solution was not an option. In deciding whether Americans prefer the one-state solution or the two-state solution or something else, look at the part of the poll that squarely asked that question, not the part of the poll that asked a merely hypothetical question.
Now, I realize that you personally believe that the two-state solution is not an option. But don’t assume that others believe the same thing. The poll showed that a plurality of American adults, 39%, DO believe that a two-state solution is an option and prefer it to any other alternatives. So they disagree with you about whether a two-state solution is possible or not. When you endorse the article’s false claim that a majority of Americans in the poll favor a one-state solution over a two-state solution, you’re implicitly interpreting many people who prefer a two-state solution AS IF they shared your belief that a two-state solution is not an option, even though that obviously isn’t what they believe. You have a perfect right to believe in the impossibility of a two-state solution, but you shouldn’t project that belief of yours onto people who said in the poll that they believe something different. The fact is that the hypothetical question in the poll, which asked what people would support IF a two-state solution was not an option, is merely exploring the hypothetical regions of people’s beliefs. And the part of the poll that asked what options people ACTUALLY prefer was the part I cited.
Even apart from the misinterpretation of the poll, I don’t think you have good enough evidence to rule out a 2-state solution. You say “A 2-state solution is no longer possible due to settlements”. Well, even if that was right, all it would mean is that a 2-state solution would be impossible as long as all these settlements continue to exist as Jewish-only zones. But neither you nor I want the settlements to continue that way permanently, and there’s no reason to assume they will permanently stay Jewish-only. Where are the Israeli settlements in Sinai now? Or the ones in Gaza? Since we know that settlements don’t all have to remain where they are, you can’t use the current existence of the settlements as a reason why a 2-state solution is impossible. I would say that any serious effort towards EITHER a 1-state solution or a 2-state solution would require changes that would allow Palestinians back onto at least some of the land currently occupied by the settlements. So settlements aren’t any more reason against a 2-state solution than they are against a 2-state solution.
“Opposite” doesn’t mean what you think it does.
The 2-state solution is dead. The 1-state, apartheid state, must end.
This article’s mistake about polls was partly fixed in Murtaza Hussain’s recent update, but only partly: the article still suggests the opposite of the truth. The new version of the article does correct the broken poll link, and the description of what the poll said has also been changed to focus on the hypothetical question of “What would you prefer if a two-state solution was not an option?”. Still, this article continues to make the false claim that Sanders’s support for a two-state solution “seems out of touch” with polling data. In fact, as the corrected poll link shows, the two-state solution that Sanders supports is the most popular option among American adults, and the one-state solution that Murtaza Hussain seems more inclined towards is less popular in the poll. Murtaza Hussain tries to describe Sanders’ support for a two-state solution as out of touch with American public opinion, but his article deliberately refuses to mention the actual polling data which shows, on the contrary, that Sanders’ two-state preference is what best fits public opinion in this country.
I am a Muslim and you are wrong about Bernie Brother. Even though we know that Israel should not even be a country, he believes that the Israelis should not be continually taking over new territories and he believes in a 2 state solution, which is better than anything anyone else has to offer. He is the lesser of the two evils.
No Maz. I learned on Twitter that Bernie Sanders and his campaign have a right to control their events and to keep out anyone they please. Moreover, it is rude of people to seek to be divisive.
In my naivete I had thought a candidate running for president of the United States is unlike a paid speaker brought in to lecture on the dime of a private organization to a ticket-paying audience. Yes, I had figured that a man running for the highest office in the land should welcome citizens (and their normal-sized signs) of all viewpoints to his campaign events.
Thank goodness for Twitter, which set me straight.
If it is a private gathering, doesn’t he or any other political candidate have the right to control the message being broadcast from his private event? I don’t see the problem with what Bernie Sanders did. He has his view point, he controls his message, and people will either vote for him or not. I have a bigger problem with the way Donald Trump handles his crowds. Donald Trump should have spoken out when white supremacists made statements in his crowds and tossed them. I don’t think Donald Trump is a white supremacist, but a politician can use their control of who is allowed at their PRIVATE functions to clearly demonstrate what their political viewpoint is. Donald Trump was leaving us guessing about something where there should have been no margin for that. I am sure once he is in the general election he will then make a big to do about kicking these people out of his rallies – as he will at that point be trying to appeal to the general public and not to conservative republicans.
I don’t give a shit what you think about Donald Trump. Bernie Sanders prohibits citizens of a certain viewpoint from his campaign events. That is very telling. As telling as your introducing white supremacists into a discussion of prohibiting pro-Palestine activists; the two are not the same.
You are now lying Mona. You have been corrected numerous times and refuse to accept that the treatment of these attendees was not Bernie’s policy and that the people involved have been fired. I think you are trolling for dissension.
It’s really unfortunate that this article is a hit piece instead of a serious discussion of where Bernie is on I-P related issues. Bernie is not blindly “pro-Israel,” as many commentators here seem to imply. However, he is also more “pro-Israel” than most progressives (including myself). I think he should be questioned on his stance when it comes to Israel and the Middle East more broadly, but this article does not engage in any substantive discussion of that topic but instead attempts to assassinate his character by focusing on how Bernie is supposedly similar to Bush in how he quashes dissent at campaign rallies.
Also, what are the alternatives on this foreign policy question? Clinton? The Reps? While Bernie has a lot of room for improvement here surely people can’t think more justice and attention to human rights for Palestinians would come from any of them.
Bullshit. This “hit piece” properly takes Sanders and his staff to task for prohibiting certain citizens from attending his campaign event. You are utterly failing to address that issue, which is what the article is about.
There is little to nothing of substance to address I that regard. The article makes a lot of sweeping claims about Bernie’s reaction to dissent based off of one incident in which only one seed of the story is heard. If the story is true the. I agree that his campaign should be criticized but this piece is generalizing way beyond the facts at hand even implying that he had a similar reaction to BLM which is utter BS. He let them take over his stage and remained silent.
“There is little to nothing of substance to address ” about what the article is actually about. I see.
It was similar, not identical. As TIME reported:
He’s since met with them.
In any event, the article is not a hit piece. You just don’t want to discuss what it is about.
Sanders never said all lives matter. O’Malley said that the first time BLM protested. When they took over his stage in Seattle he politely stepped back and let them take it. The very reason why they were able to do that is because Bernie’s campaign doesn’t, or at least didn’t, tightly control who was at the rallies and what they were there to do like his opponents. That fact makes the authors continued comparison between Sanders and Bush completely disingenuous. And btw,if that post above is really from the campaign manager, and he’s not lying about having told the author what he claims he did, then the Intercept has some retracting and apologizing to do.
He actually didn’t say that Governor Martin OMalley did. Senator said “of course Black Lives Matter and I spent 50 years defending equal rights.
That’s my bad then, for relying on TIME. I shoulda known better.
Vote for
The Party of The Lesser Evil
Yes absolutely. Vote for the candidate that closest to what you think is ideal. That’s just common sense…or don’t vote at all if you think it’s worth electing anyone or if you think the candidates don’t differ enough, but selecting the best alternative is by no means stupid…
Should I link you to an article that gives an analysis of more than a thousand bills before Congress showing that voters that are not part of Big Money have no influence on the bill’s outcome?
You know this already. You have no influence on what “your” candidate is going to do once elected. None. (Or are you rich?)
None.
Israel equals war. Period.
Bernie equals war. Period.
How close is that to your “ideal”?
As I see the article, it’s doing two things. First, it criticizes Sanders and his campaign for censoring friendly criticism of the candidate at his rally. Second, it aims to suggest, especially to those of us who have some sympathy with many of Sanders’ positions but are less “pro-Israel” than him, that Sanders isn’t going to listen to our views, is closed-minded, will silence us to make himself look good, sees his supporters as nuisances in cases where they let him know they don’t see eye-to-eye with him, and therefore in general may not live up to the hopes placed in him. Both these points are reasonable, I think. The article makes creditworthy efforts to establish these two main points, and we need more articles making points like these about Sanders and about other candidates, so that people aren’t duped into giving candidates overenthusiastic support.
Pelle’s comment criticizes the article for failing to adequately explore Sanders’ stance on Israel-Palestine-related issues, and I guess Pelle has a point there, kind of. The article does devote a couple of paragraphs to criticizing Sanders for not being pro-Palestinian enough, and those paragraphs aim at making Sanders look bad to supporters of Palestinian rights. Is Pelle right in suggesting that the article would be better if those paragraphs which criticize Sanders’ Palestine stance were less of a “hit piece” and more of a “serious discussion”? I guess maybe Pelle is right on that. But in context of the whole article, that’s a minor flaw and not what the article was mainly aiming at. The article’s main goals were to inform people of the censorship by Sanders’ campaign staff and to give evidence that Sanders may just not want to listen to his supporters on this issue and others. Those two goals are enough by themselves to make a worthwhile article, and Pelle’s criticism of the article seems like only a minor flaw in comparison.
I still think Bernie is the best candidate but I unsubscribed from his mailing lists – which means no active campaigning for him – after realizing he supported Israeli terrorism.
This isn’t so hard to figure out. It’s all about controlling the message. No campaign seems to be able to embrace spontaneity anymore – too much can go wrong. If something spontaneous pops up, then the campaign has to say, “whoa, hold on there! We need to see how / if we can assimilate this into our campaign, how we can spin it, how we can package it!” Just like Bernie did with Black Lives Matter. He actually uses the phrase on his campaign site – NOW – but (no doubt) only after he and his campaign took a long time figuring out how to package it and how to make it seem to align with his platform. Only pre-planned spontaneity is allowed anymore! The last thing any campaign needs is to leave anything to chance. No matter that it could be an historic momentum-builder; the perceived downside is simply too great in this age of carefully-orchestrated everything.
Get a decent editor.
“Even Sanders’ support for a two-state solution to the Israel/Palestine conflict, which he progressively advocated before it became mainstream U.S. orthodoxy, now seems out of touch; a 2014 Brookings Institute poll found a majority of Americans favored a more radical one-state solution to the conflict.”
^That claim is not supported by the link it includes.
I checked that poll and also found the same thing.
“PEP” means “progressive except Palestine.” That’s what Sanders is. No matter how he positions himself, his actions reveal him as just another AIPAC shill, ready to execute whatever order the mother country demands of him.
Pragmatically speaking, Sanders is going to have to articulate a new vision for the Middle East and in particular US foreign policy there. The issue is just too central at this point, for all the worst reasons, to the future of the US and the people in it. US foreign policy in the Middle East has been so disastrous that our nation is now actively at loggerheads with most countries in the region, and even Russia, in Syria. US foreign policy has pr oduced the biggest strategic disaster in our national history, and a humanitarian disaster of historical proportions in the region.
Toeing the Netanyah-Bennett line is just not going to work. The Israel-Palestine crisis will either be solved positively, in very short order, or the worst is going to happen there and the blowback against us will be tremendous.
Sanders may have fond feelings towards Israel; that is fine. However, if he sides with the proto-Fascist regime there, as a candidate, he will damage his candidacy and fail to offer the public any choice whatsoever from the Bush-Clinton-Biden-Obama-Everyone-Else Axis of Israel boosting, wars, and continued decline in the region, with the US being sucked ever deeper into the sandtrap.
Finally, I find it disturbing that Sanders would support any of the atrocious Israeli slaughters in Gaza, or the expansion of settlements, and he needs to make it clear very soon that if he is elected he will oppose in general settlement expansion (including the current land theft underway in Syrian Golan Heights) and further slaughters.
If you know all of the things that he needs to do, why aren’t you running?
What a thoughtful response. If you’re so smart, why don’t you do it. If it was only so simple :)
Your question is idiotic, in more ways than can be really pointed out in this format. Let’s start with a couple ways your question is idiotic, however:
* I don’t have a career in politics upon which to base a presidential run; and the fact that Sanders has a career in politics does not diminish one whit the truth in what I wrote.
* There are many, many people who comment on what they believe Sanders should do, and none of them are running for office. Is any commentary whatsoever invalid unless the commenter is running for office? What implications would this have for Sanders’ paid staff and personal confidants, all of whom state “what he should do”, but none of whom are running for president.
* I am hardly alone in voicing discontent with the state of affairs vis-a-vis US foreign policy in the Middle East and Israel. Whether you like it or not, or whether Sanders likes it, or not, he is going to have to articulate a new vision for US foreign policy in the Middle East, in part because the voters he needs to nominate him are demanding it, and in part, because the reality of the American future demands it.
Did you have a different or further point you cared to make?
@CAF…gr8 comment & right to the point. But another troubling pattern that has been emerging even before Bu$h 2 is the ‘pick-and-choose’ silencing of speech in America (the supposed land of the free). And not only by the Republicans but disturbingly by the Democrats as well. As for myself, I find it difficult to be both liberal & a Democrat. It is in a way a contradiction. So many people & even many of my friends consider themselves ‘liberal’ & it is true but they still hang on to the Democratic party even though Dems cower to Israel, are warmongers & thieves etc. Instead, I give voice to 3rd parties, where a truer democracy belongs. But my point is we are losing 1st Amendment rights, as well as others, as quickly as the seas are rising.
I no longer consider myself “liberal”; I am a leftist mostly, but not vaguely afraid of breaking away from certain ideological premises of “liberalism”.
I am also a long-term Democratic primary voter, small donor, protester, letter-writer, etc.
If Sanders gets the nomination, I’ll vote. Otherwise, no. There are many reasons why. Let’s just say that Hillary Clinton was the final insult to my continued involvement with the Democrats. That silly party has one chance left.
And Sanders, yes, must articulate a new vision for the US in the Middle East. The status quo has produced the worst strategic disaster in our national history, and one of the worst humanitarian disasters in living memory. Our joined-at-the-hip posture with respect to Israel, courtesy of the Israel lobby and Israel’s meddling in our national affairs, is a core part of the current strategic disaster, and that posture must change even as the next President explains how we are going to make a clean break with the Middle East.
CAF, Thank you for your response and I appreciate this dialogue. Many continue to consider themselves liberal because for one reason it, as well as the flag, has been hijacked by the radical right. I feels like we keep losing ground and to shift away from the lamestream status quo is our only hope and I hope Bernie does well but even he if elected he will have to answer to the DNC and its agenda which contradicts many of Bernie’s positions. But thanks again for your thoughts, as I agree. Onward and Upward
The DNC sure seems at odds with the people it wants to presume comprise its “base”. I think contradiction is probably a good idea.
So if Bernie Sanders didn’t get the Dem nomination, you’d rather stay home than vote for a different candidate, say, Jill Stein if she’s on the ballot in your state? Is it really not worth going to the polls anyway to help a party that, if you really are “a leftist mostly”, you likely agree with quite a bit? If Jill got 5% of the vote, that would unlock large amounts of public funding and get the Green Party automatic ballot access in most of the country.
And Howard has a point with his last few sentences; we might not have the option to vote for an alternative candidate much longer if our country keeps heading further down the road that leads to fascism.
If Bernie disses Israel then AIPAC will guarantee his defeat. There will never be a major candidate openly critical of Israel.
Obama did the opposite of his campaign promises; perhaps Bernie will screw Israel after he is elected …
If a candidate cannot openly stand up to the NRA, MIC and Israel lobby, then they have no business running, and/or, don’t deserve our votes.
“US foreign policy has produced the biggest strategic disaster in our national history, and a humanitarian disaster of historical proportions in the region.”
Epic, sickening humanitarian disaster, absolutely.
But, no accident, no ‘strategic disaster’. Chaos is indispensable to neocon strategic success, everything else is mere collateral chaff of convenience. Old school SS stuff, but no matter.
And exploded infants, children? What of them? No signs allowed.
How can Bernie be pro-Israel and not pro-war?
Not possible.