This was Falk’s latest diatribe where he stands in front of the mirror and talks to himself.
My only comment to Richard Falk:
“All lies.
But since you refuse to allow free and honest debate..why bother.
Enjoy your incestuous love-fest!
Talk about fascism!!”
Falkuncensored 
Here’s my comment, just posted on Falk’s website:
You are again misleading your readers.
“Those living in Israel or under occupation are given a fugitive identity by being called ‘Arabs,’ a designation that functions as a way of denying nationalist claims based on a ‘Palestinian’ primary identity.”
Those living under occupation are generally called Palestinians. Those living in Israel are generally called Israeli Arabs. How on earth would you know how Israelis refer to Arabs? Insofar as the primary national identity of Israeli Arabs is Palestinian, you have a very problematic situation that goes a long way toward explaining why Israeli Arabs experience discrimination as a potential fifth column.
“Law of Return …Displacement of Arabs.”
I’m glad to see that you are finally acknowledging that many other countries have immigration laws favoring returning expatriates at the expense of national minorities. Obviously a Jew who “returns” under this law does not have “tenuous” links to Israel but feels bound very strongly to the Jewish state, like myself. And the “sanctuary” was not created by displacing anyone. It was created through a partition plan that left the Arabs where they were, under Jewish sovereignty. Their response was an attempt to destroy the State of Israel and, if we are going to be honest, massacre its Jewish population.
“The apartheid structures of occupation.”
I have pointed out dozens of times that by definition an occupation entails separation between the occupying power and the occupied population. The word apartheid was not coined to describe such a situation. If it were, all occupations would be forms of apartheid, and I again invite you to consider how the Allies would have responded if the Germans had proclaimed “no peace, no negotiations, no recognition” after the Allied occupation, had engaged from the outset in acts of terror against Allied civilians inside and outside Germany, and had refused to disavow their Nazi leaders.
“Also, Israel’s consistent reliance on excessive force against Palestinian protests and resistance activities is also a sign of fascist disrespect for adversary ethnic and religious identities, and even of the right to dissent and display a posture of opposition to the state.”
The protests and resistance activities you are talking about include blowing up Israeli women and children in restaurants and buses and firing thousands of rockets at Israel’s civilian population. To call the measures taken to prevent these barbaric acts “fascist disrespect” is shameless.
I understand that it is irresistibly tempting to expand the meaning of the word fascism in the way you have expanded the meaning of the word apartheid so that you can apply it to Israel. Israel is neither a fascist nor an apartheid state. It is a state with a national minority that has legitimate complaints but would not consent to live under Palestinian sovereignty for all the money in the world.
I invite you to consider Mike 71’s comment to your Jeff Halper post, which makes more sense than anything I have seen on your website in quite some time.
LikeLike