Home | About | Donate

The Troubling Implications of Hillary’s Anti-BDS Letter


#1

The Troubling Implications of Hillary’s Anti-BDS Letter

Stephen Zunes

On July 2, former secretary of state and frontrunner for the Democratic presidential nomination Hillary Clinton wrote a letter to Israeli-American billionaire Haim Saban, a strong supporter of the right-wing Netanyahu government, denouncing human rights activists who support boycott/divestment/sanctions (BDS) against the Israeli occupation.


#2

This post was flagged by the community and is temporarily hidden.


#3

Few voters are aware of Hillary's letter, and few read Foreign Policy in Focus or CD. I will provide at no charge a penetrating analysis of how the average voter thinks of the 2016 election: It was cool that we had a black President. So it would be cool if we have a woman President.


#4

Clinton has to make it clear that she's firmly in the Zionist Camp because Obama's attempt to negotiate a nuclear deal with Iran has many Zionists saying he's betrayed Israel, is a Muslim etc. Hell, they're still pissed because he didn't openly attack Assad in Syria.

So Hillary has to show that the next Democratic President won't be saying or doing things the Zionists won't like.


#6

Hillary's stated stances are a love letter to Sheldon Adelson and right wing (pro-Israel) campaign donors.

It's THAT time of year... in the political high season, after all.

Excellent analysis, Mr. Zunes. I am especially in favor of pointing out the nature of asymmetric battles wherever they are found. And there is no shortage of that very item.


#7

Another "new name/poster" who spontaneously appears to insist that problems in this nation are voters' fault.

Talking Point #1.


#8

the richest gop leaders bought the dome too bad i am speacking anti gop as a jewish woman! isreal back off!


#9

4 out of the 7 gop scum have been funded by WHITE SUPREMIST ORG. WHAT THE HELL IS GOING ON IN THIS NOT SO NICE OR DEMOCRATIC NATION


#10

"New" poster? ZP's been here commenting since the new system launched five months ago. Joined the same day you did.


#11

Clinton could switch to the Republican party and not have to change her positions on the issues.


#12

Seeing that photo I am just waiting for her to belt out a verse of "Thats Entertainment".

The guy who was waving the flag
That began with the mystical hand
Hip hooray! The American way
The world is a stage; the stage is a world of entertainment!


#13

Election after election I have the choice of aipac bootlicker a or b. Last town hall meeting i attended my dem house rep brad sherman gave a speech saying israeli attacks on gaza was no more a war crime than america fighting wwii. I recorded that speech. The zionist bootlicker cant tell the difference between fighting an army capable of blitzkrieg and people trapped in an open air prison.
I like an america thats for the people by the people with liberty and justice for all
dem and gop have failed those goals.
i switched to the green party of america. They won't take corporate money are for palestine right of return. They think a one state solution recognizing christian, Muslim and jewish ties to the land under democracy.
Jill stein is running for president under the green party. She is against selling israel weapons
I think bds will help parties like the green party gain traction by undermining aipac support.
Voting for the lesser of evils has yielded the failure of government we have. Voting for what you want is not a wasted vote. Its a vote that shows there are like minded people. Voting for what you want can gain traction.


#14

As much as I don't disagree with what you're claiming here (and have voted "non-strategically" before and have been appalled for decades at the US's irrational blind support for the Tel Aviv regime), the Obama presidency has undoubtedly been way better than a Romney one would have been which we could have had if more folks like u and me had not chosen Obama as the lesser of two evils in 2008 and 2112. In many ways, he's done an excellent job under incredibly difficult circumstances. And it may well be that the areas in which he's continued the Bush legacy are areas that are no longer under the control of any US President --- as much as that thought scares me.


#16

From the article: "In the letter, made public a few days later, Clinton made a number of statements which are not only demonstrably false but raise serious concerns regarding what kind of policies she would pursue as president."
HRC is showing herself to be a very dangerous candidate for democratic ideals. At what point are we forced to admit that the labeling of an economic boycott as "terrorism" is only made by those who by definition serve the interests of fascism?


#17

She can't "usher the USA into constant conflicts, loss of lives, lower standing in the world and further economic depression, as that was ushered in decades ago. However she is certainly capable of increasing the US Fourth Reich's barbaric treatment of anybody or any country that doesn't agree with her policies.
* She shows as little concern for the people of "her" country as she does for the rest of the world, i.e., the only people who count are those with millions, billions, or trillions in their accounts, and whom she wants as her benefactors. The rest of us can starve or die as we are of no value except as servants and she has plenty of those already.
* As I said the other day, I wouldn't want her in any position, not even as dogcatcher in a small county, for if she was, you could be certain it would not be a no-kill shelter.
;-})


#18

Shucks, Souxrose11, is a pretty "new name/poster" as well .... thought you do sound rather familiar ...

As for voters' fault - shucks no, these guys got into office like Aphrodite sprung from the head of Zeus- by magic ...


#19

Hi! - Just tried to "like" your post, but wasn't allowed to do so ....

Hmmm, now it appears to have shown up ....

Any way, agree with you Stein is my candidate ---- interesting that Bernie hasn't been publicly questioned on his position ...


#20

"Way better than Romney" - oh, I dunno, maybe Romney writ large, as in Romney care to Obama care ...

"An excellent job ...." Boy you do have low standards ....


#21

" ... anytime soon." or ever ...


#23

There's no reason for Clinton to switch parties to justify her position. Her position is completely in line with the Democratic Party's position. The oppression of people of color, whether Palestinian, Black or Indigenous is a well-worn tool used by those in power in both parties since their inception and by those in power during the settlement of white people on the American continents centuries ago. The Palestinian people will find no savior among the current crop of Democratic or Republican candidates for president either. They are all pro-Zion to the person.

The over-the-top US support of Israel has only exacerbated the Israeli Occupation by emboldening the Israeli right-wing political machine and strengthening their resolve. Our elected officials are mostly wholly owned subsidiaries of AIPAC and Israel knows it. They use that knowledge to hold our foreign policy hostage, along with growing numbers of Palestinians, with the certain knowledge that the US will do nothing to stop them, despite the 77 (and counting) UN resolutions of condemnation against Israel's treatment of Palestinian people.

If Hillary Clinton disapproves of BDS, then they are undoubtedly doing something right. Go BDS!