This is the most stimulating, mind-overhauling shit i have read in a COON's age! I don't even know what a coon is but maybe it's a wsy of comng to know what sort of COINAGE your mind is actually forged in!
On "Does Hamas Represent..." --thank you for this and well done. I think this is the most comprehensive and honest look at the question I've seen. Would love to be able to publicly share just that one essay. It's an important topic that obviously arouses heated opinions over here.
please do. We are all looking for content that we can forward to our blind 'progressive' friends who continue to use 'genocide' etc as part of all of their advocacy. We really need for those who are not looking for it to be able to read what you wrote.
Very good. There is a lot to take in here, but I would like to comment on one part - being "DOES HAMAS REPRESENT THE PALESTINIAN PEOPLE?"
Ever since Oslo and probably before there basic dinner table conversation was "do Palestinian mothers just want their sons at home eating at their table instead of out becoming Shahids (martyrs)?"
We discussed this around our own dinner table dozens if not hundreds of times and we could never really find an answer. I know that we all wanted the answer to be - a Palestinian mother is like any other mother and wants her son safe and sound.
Currently I would like to say that that question as well as the one you present and try to analyze is no longer relevant. After October 7 there are only two questions we need to ask:
1. Are you planning on attacking and killing us? If so, we will stop that and destroy your means and kill those who actively oppose our attempts to destroy your means.
2. Are you now trying to kill us? If so, we will kill you.
I don't care anymore what the percentages are who support Hamas or October 7 or terror against Israel and the West in general. I don't care who is and who isn't for peace. And I certainly don't need them to recognize Israel as a Jewish state. I only care if you try to kill us. If you do, you will be killed.
My message to Palestinians is that you can live any life you want.
I used to be a believer of Natan Sharansky's dictum - that we need good neighbors who want to live in freedom. One of my sons, who has much experience fighting Palestinian terrorists, once said that there will be peace when they treat their women better. That is true because it assumes they can adapt western ways of behavior. But that is not an interest to me anymore.
Now I say if you want to kill your sister because she flirted with a boy or kill your mother because she shamed your family by smiling at the storekeeper, that is your business. You can live any life you want - you just can't try to kill us. If you want to live in a corrupt and violent society - that is your call. You just can't try to kill us.
Claire thank you for going to so much trouble. The part about water would be hilarious if it were not so sad. Something I think worth emphasising when considering the possibility of a peaceful future for Israel and its neighbours: So long as external actors are funding terrorism, it will never happen. Iran and its proxies are committed to the destruction of Israel. They fund, train, and act, Obliterating Hamas may bring some breathing space, but it won't be long before there will be another upsurge of violence. What's going on needs to be seen as a regional issue. The US seems to have a very blinkered view about this, wanting to avoid "enlarging" the war there when it is already enlarged. It seems the US "privately" told Iran to back off yesterday over Yemen. Good luck with that! Iran's got its playbook well oiled. If it does back off, it waits and comes back. It's been doing it for a long time, and it is working for it. Iran's strategy is two pronged: against Israel and against Saudi Arabia. In its support of Hamas, it is supporting a Sunni movement which suggests that if successful in its aims, Hamas is in for a surprise later on, if events in Iraq are a guide. (See Will Selber's account of is time there in The Bulwark). Iran is an accomplished practitioner of the atrocities Hamas now flaunts. Of course all this is very depressing and it's even more depressing when the western "pro-Palestinians" (who are actually "pro-Hamas/Hezbollah/Houthi/Iran") are in thrall to monsters. Your piece about support for Hamas in Gaza and the West Bank is right when you say, who can say? I wouldn't trust any poll. Hamas runs a totalitarian dictatorship and its reach extends to the West Bank. Opponents risk their lives criticising. Obviously there is support for Hamas but it may not be nearly so strong as suggested. To me, most people want a quiet life, and in the not so long ago demonstrations at the border with Israel supposedly organised to return to their old digs, the numbers weren't really that large in a place with more than 2 million people. More power to your elbow, Claire.
Thanks, interesting on all fronts, especially the water story. (Still strikes me that whatever proportion of the total it represented, cutting the supply has all the strategic nous of a missile strike on a baby milk plant.)
If recognising I have some progressive disease would mean giving up the driver's license my lifestyle depends upon, you can bet I will find creative ways to avoid or ignore the obvious truth - until I decide I don't want to drive anyway. Suspect this applies in spades to opinion measurement in conflict zones. There's too much deceptive rationalisation required just to get through the day.
Thanks, Claire. That was indeed a thoughtful—and detailed—answer to my question. I think, however, that I need to read it through again and sort things out before responding. Hey, you made me wait...
I'm glad you thought so. I'm glad you read them. I wasn't planning to write this at all, but somehow I found myself unable to write anything else this week. I sometimes get bored with the limitations of the newsletter format and want to try something different. I figured, "I'm the editor, and if I say it's permissible to publish four essays and 10,000 words in a single day, that's the new rule." But I'm a bit worried readers will tell me, "No, Claire. We're not reading. that."
If anyone can help me. I am a uni prof suspended with pay because of a post (I won't put here but I can send u) that equated Hamas with Nazis. (Responded to a deleted vile post that was pro dead Jew) After ranting (not my finest prose) I said if u stand with Palestine u stand with Nazis I was both being sarcastic and annoyed with the "stand with Palestine" and I was indicating that it meant standing with the PAL gov Hamas. But I am under two human rights charges, banished, suspended, accused thorough the gossip mill of essentially actually killing babies (the slander and gossip is untraceable and I am not allowed to communicate with staff and students to refute charges. Senior managers have reputedly bragged to subordinates I will be fired. So I have gone from top ranked prof to demonized pariah. I have a great lawyer but this is university justice. My question is how do I substantiate my stupidly phrased "if u stand with Palestinians u stand with Nazis" phrase when I meant the gov. Obviously non combatants don't deserve death but realistically Gazans and gazan culture is pretty clearly very pro "let's kill all Jews". It's not like we want peace and love and if we could we'd throw off these savages and live in peace. Any advice would be helpful. Funny the other prof at the uni who attacks me is outwardly for the elimination of Israel, accuses the IDF of killing hostages to save money, makes joles about skinning Jews alive, denies tunnels are in Gaza, praises Hamas and Houthis says genocide/apartheid. All the Jewish students are too afraid to complain against me. But white woke tiktokers have no problem lodging formal complaints against me. I'm fighting for my career. 416 357 4341 what's app.
First, get your Russian mother-in-law to explain to you, perhaps with your spouse translating, why you are where you are. I predict her gist will be that you groundlessly assumed your academic workplace was somehow a domain of untrammeled intellectual inquiry and expression -- when in fact it is obviously very much not that.
Next, do what Claire said but more so: sue even people who have not complained about you. Take you case as public as you can, including writing a quickie book about it; you're trained to do that. And finally, if you aren't vindicated, consider a career in fighting this sort of thing. You have a calling to educate. Well, here's a huge opportunity.
But I suspect that substantiating your claim won't do a damned bit of good. From what I've seen, the only way to win these imbroglios is by massively escalating and going on offense. Start suing. Sue everyone, top to bottom. Massive and unexpected retaliation sometimes gets them to back down. Defensiveness and explanations never work. Sue for slander, defamation, workplace harassment, Title IX violations (if you're in the US). File charges of hate speech (if you're somewhere else). Sue the president of the university, the chair of the department, everyone who complained about you. Sue for astronomical damages--you want them to be as stressed as you feel now. These people are always cowards. They're expecting you to cringe and grovel. Don't.
This is the most stimulating, mind-overhauling shit i have read in a COON's age! I don't even know what a coon is but maybe it's a wsy of comng to know what sort of COINAGE your mind is actually forged in!
On "Does Hamas Represent..." --thank you for this and well done. I think this is the most comprehensive and honest look at the question I've seen. Would love to be able to publicly share just that one essay. It's an important topic that obviously arouses heated opinions over here.
I've taken the paywall off the whole article. Feel free to share.
Perhaps I'll separate it and take the paywall off.
please do. We are all looking for content that we can forward to our blind 'progressive' friends who continue to use 'genocide' etc as part of all of their advocacy. We really need for those who are not looking for it to be able to read what you wrote.
Very good. There is a lot to take in here, but I would like to comment on one part - being "DOES HAMAS REPRESENT THE PALESTINIAN PEOPLE?"
Ever since Oslo and probably before there basic dinner table conversation was "do Palestinian mothers just want their sons at home eating at their table instead of out becoming Shahids (martyrs)?"
We discussed this around our own dinner table dozens if not hundreds of times and we could never really find an answer. I know that we all wanted the answer to be - a Palestinian mother is like any other mother and wants her son safe and sound.
Currently I would like to say that that question as well as the one you present and try to analyze is no longer relevant. After October 7 there are only two questions we need to ask:
1. Are you planning on attacking and killing us? If so, we will stop that and destroy your means and kill those who actively oppose our attempts to destroy your means.
2. Are you now trying to kill us? If so, we will kill you.
I don't care anymore what the percentages are who support Hamas or October 7 or terror against Israel and the West in general. I don't care who is and who isn't for peace. And I certainly don't need them to recognize Israel as a Jewish state. I only care if you try to kill us. If you do, you will be killed.
My message to Palestinians is that you can live any life you want.
I used to be a believer of Natan Sharansky's dictum - that we need good neighbors who want to live in freedom. One of my sons, who has much experience fighting Palestinian terrorists, once said that there will be peace when they treat their women better. That is true because it assumes they can adapt western ways of behavior. But that is not an interest to me anymore.
Now I say if you want to kill your sister because she flirted with a boy or kill your mother because she shamed your family by smiling at the storekeeper, that is your business. You can live any life you want - you just can't try to kill us. If you want to live in a corrupt and violent society - that is your call. You just can't try to kill us.
It is sad that it has come to this - but it has.
Where were you a few months ago? 😂 can I somehow ask some questions of you privately?
You mean like a DM? No, Substack doesn't have that, but you can send me an old-fashioned think called "an email."
It could be me but I didn't see one listed. . .you're so sarcastic :) haha
Claire thank you for going to so much trouble. The part about water would be hilarious if it were not so sad. Something I think worth emphasising when considering the possibility of a peaceful future for Israel and its neighbours: So long as external actors are funding terrorism, it will never happen. Iran and its proxies are committed to the destruction of Israel. They fund, train, and act, Obliterating Hamas may bring some breathing space, but it won't be long before there will be another upsurge of violence. What's going on needs to be seen as a regional issue. The US seems to have a very blinkered view about this, wanting to avoid "enlarging" the war there when it is already enlarged. It seems the US "privately" told Iran to back off yesterday over Yemen. Good luck with that! Iran's got its playbook well oiled. If it does back off, it waits and comes back. It's been doing it for a long time, and it is working for it. Iran's strategy is two pronged: against Israel and against Saudi Arabia. In its support of Hamas, it is supporting a Sunni movement which suggests that if successful in its aims, Hamas is in for a surprise later on, if events in Iraq are a guide. (See Will Selber's account of is time there in The Bulwark). Iran is an accomplished practitioner of the atrocities Hamas now flaunts. Of course all this is very depressing and it's even more depressing when the western "pro-Palestinians" (who are actually "pro-Hamas/Hezbollah/Houthi/Iran") are in thrall to monsters. Your piece about support for Hamas in Gaza and the West Bank is right when you say, who can say? I wouldn't trust any poll. Hamas runs a totalitarian dictatorship and its reach extends to the West Bank. Opponents risk their lives criticising. Obviously there is support for Hamas but it may not be nearly so strong as suggested. To me, most people want a quiet life, and in the not so long ago demonstrations at the border with Israel supposedly organised to return to their old digs, the numbers weren't really that large in a place with more than 2 million people. More power to your elbow, Claire.
Thank you ..
Thanks, interesting on all fronts, especially the water story. (Still strikes me that whatever proportion of the total it represented, cutting the supply has all the strategic nous of a missile strike on a baby milk plant.)
If recognising I have some progressive disease would mean giving up the driver's license my lifestyle depends upon, you can bet I will find creative ways to avoid or ignore the obvious truth - until I decide I don't want to drive anyway. Suspect this applies in spades to opinion measurement in conflict zones. There's too much deceptive rationalisation required just to get through the day.
Also, Owen Jones *and* Benjy Burgis in one post - you are spoiling us!
Yes, such vibrant threads in the vivid tapestry of our lunatic firmament they are ..
Firmament, or fundament?
I sent your advise to my lawyer. She wanted to do this anyway but your words help fortify us.
Thanks, Claire. That was indeed a thoughtful—and detailed—answer to my question. I think, however, that I need to read it through again and sort things out before responding. Hey, you made me wait...
these are excellent essays Claire, so glad I subscribe, cheers.
I'm glad you thought so. I'm glad you read them. I wasn't planning to write this at all, but somehow I found myself unable to write anything else this week. I sometimes get bored with the limitations of the newsletter format and want to try something different. I figured, "I'm the editor, and if I say it's permissible to publish four essays and 10,000 words in a single day, that's the new rule." But I'm a bit worried readers will tell me, "No, Claire. We're not reading. that."
Complain against him not me
If anyone can help me. I am a uni prof suspended with pay because of a post (I won't put here but I can send u) that equated Hamas with Nazis. (Responded to a deleted vile post that was pro dead Jew) After ranting (not my finest prose) I said if u stand with Palestine u stand with Nazis I was both being sarcastic and annoyed with the "stand with Palestine" and I was indicating that it meant standing with the PAL gov Hamas. But I am under two human rights charges, banished, suspended, accused thorough the gossip mill of essentially actually killing babies (the slander and gossip is untraceable and I am not allowed to communicate with staff and students to refute charges. Senior managers have reputedly bragged to subordinates I will be fired. So I have gone from top ranked prof to demonized pariah. I have a great lawyer but this is university justice. My question is how do I substantiate my stupidly phrased "if u stand with Palestinians u stand with Nazis" phrase when I meant the gov. Obviously non combatants don't deserve death but realistically Gazans and gazan culture is pretty clearly very pro "let's kill all Jews". It's not like we want peace and love and if we could we'd throw off these savages and live in peace. Any advice would be helpful. Funny the other prof at the uni who attacks me is outwardly for the elimination of Israel, accuses the IDF of killing hostages to save money, makes joles about skinning Jews alive, denies tunnels are in Gaza, praises Hamas and Houthis says genocide/apartheid. All the Jewish students are too afraid to complain against me. But white woke tiktokers have no problem lodging formal complaints against me. I'm fighting for my career. 416 357 4341 what's app.
First, get your Russian mother-in-law to explain to you, perhaps with your spouse translating, why you are where you are. I predict her gist will be that you groundlessly assumed your academic workplace was somehow a domain of untrammeled intellectual inquiry and expression -- when in fact it is obviously very much not that.
Next, do what Claire said but more so: sue even people who have not complained about you. Take you case as public as you can, including writing a quickie book about it; you're trained to do that. And finally, if you aren't vindicated, consider a career in fighting this sort of thing. You have a calling to educate. Well, here's a huge opportunity.
Wow.
Well, you've come to the right place. Start here: https://claireberlinski.substack.com/p/middle-east-101-week-v-7b5
But I suspect that substantiating your claim won't do a damned bit of good. From what I've seen, the only way to win these imbroglios is by massively escalating and going on offense. Start suing. Sue everyone, top to bottom. Massive and unexpected retaliation sometimes gets them to back down. Defensiveness and explanations never work. Sue for slander, defamation, workplace harassment, Title IX violations (if you're in the US). File charges of hate speech (if you're somewhere else). Sue the president of the university, the chair of the department, everyone who complained about you. Sue for astronomical damages--you want them to be as stressed as you feel now. These people are always cowards. They're expecting you to cringe and grovel. Don't.
Thx so much.
I just read the article about your case. Don't even apologize. You have nothing for which to apologize except spelling "you" as "u."
😂