Here is something else about Ruth Wisse. You can see that she is going to be hosted at the San Francisco Jewish Community Center this spring as part of a program from the Jewish Forward, a generally progressive newspaper. Does the Forward endorse her ideas of young American Jews serving Israel as an intellectual army in the U.S.? Abe Foxman, who has opposed recognition of the Armenian genocide, is also on the Forward’s list. What is the Forward promoting here?
A related point. Joe Lieberman (whose daughter not long ago married Ruth Wisse’s son) lately endorsed John McCain for president. McCain is anti-abortion. Lieberman presumably endorsed him because of his hawkish views on the Middle East. I see the endorsement as emblematic. Norman Podhoretz left the Democratic party in the 70s, with the other neocons. Today another iceberg is calving: Some Jewish liberals appear to be casting away traditional political concerns (abortion) for the core concern of Israel. In this way neoconservatism and Democratic neoliberalism become indistinguishable.
Related posts:
- Is Bible-Thumping Lieberman Giving His Dem Backers Buyers’ Remorse, Aiding Obama?
- Maybe Hillary Should Pull a Lieberman and Run All the Way to November
- Conflation Again: Lieberman Says Israel Is the ‘Strongest Roots’ of U.S. Foreign Policy
- Can we start a brushfire re Ruth Bader Ginsburg’s weird statement about abortion/eugenics?
- ‘J Street’ drives its wedge: Lieberman & Lieberman
{ 39 comments }
Depends on your point of view. One might suggest that they are simply manifestations of the same thing: Jewish Ethnocentrism. Jewish "liberalism" was always aimed at deconstructing gentile society – attacking the Christian core values, for example.
Immigration is another example – jewish only immigration to israel= good
open immigration for the US= good.
In both cases Jews are served. However, from the outside Jews look like blatant hypocrites.
To: any Jewish readers who read Weiss' blog
Q 1: have his postings regarding dual loyalty changed your thinking? Is Weiss having any impact in the direction that he desires?
Q2: What should Christians make of Jewish dual loyalty since most Christians do not believe that U.S. and Jewish interest overlap?
"me": I would be interested in what specific Christian core values "Jewish liberalism" – meaning Jews generally or only liberal Jews? – attacks?
Do you think religious Jews respect the Christian core values?
Phil Weiss seems to define himself as a liberal or progressive, have you ever noticed him attacking Christian core values?
ANON: so far I did not have the impression Phil Weiss is the leader type trying to influence us reading sheep.
My impression as a gentile is more that he lets us participate in his thought processes.
Could you try to define the "direction of his desire" for me?
What position do you think Christian fundamentalist have on the "dual loyalty" issue? Do you think they all have the same position on the issue no matter if they are Protestants, Roman Catholics, Eastern Orthodox, Evangelicals et cetera?
This is for Tonto the hypocrite
In a murderous quest aimed at "cleansing" their turf of snitches and rival gangsters, members of one of Los Angeles County's most vicious Latino gangs sometimes killed people just because of their race, an investigation found.
There were even instances in which Florencia 13 leaders ordered killings of black gangsters and then, when the intended victim couldn't be located, said "Well, shoot any black you see," Los Angeles County Sheriff Lee Baca said.
"In certain cases some murders were just purely motivated on killing a black person," Baca said.
Authorities say there were 20 murders among more than 80 shootings documented during the gang's rampage in the hardscrabble Florence-Firestone neighborhood, exceptional even in an area where gang violence has been commonplace for decades. They don't specify the time frame or how many of the killings were racial.
Los Angeles has struggled with gang violence for years, especially during the wars in the late 1980s and early '90s between the Crips and the Bloods – both black gangs. Latino gangs have gained influence since then as the Hispanic population surged.
Evidence of Florencia 13, or F13, is easy to find in Florence-Firestone. Arrows spray-painted on the wall of a liquor store mark the gang's boundary and graffiti warns rivals to steer clear.
The gang's name comes from the neighborhood that is its stronghold and the 13th letter of the alphabet – M – representing the gang's ties to the Mexican Mafia.
Federal, state and local officials worked together to charge 102 men linked to F13 with racketeering, conspiracy to murder, weapons possession, drug dealing and other crimes. In terms of people charged, it's the largest-ever federal case involving a Southern California gang, prosecutors say. More than 80 of those indicted are in custody.
But eliminating the gang won't be easy. It's survived for decades and is believed to have about 2,000 members. Its reach extends to Nevada, Arizona and into prisons, where prosecutors say incarcerated gang leaders were able to order hits on black gangsters.
According to the indictment, F13's leader, Arturo Castellanos, sent word in 2004 from California's fortress-like Pelican Bay State Prison that he wanted his street soldiers to begin "cleansing" Florence-Firestone of black gangsters, notably the East Coast Crips, and snitches.
His followers eagerly obeyed, according to federal prosecutors.
In one case, F13 members came across a black man at a bus stop, shouted "Cheese toast!" and fired. "Cheese toast" is a derogatory name for East Coast Crips, Assistant U.S. Attorney Kevin S. Rosenberg said.
The victim, apparently targeted only because of his skin color, survived being shot several times, Rosenberg said.
F13 isn't the only Latino gang linked to racial killings. Last year, four members of The Avenues, a gang from the Highland Park area east of downtown Los Angeles, were convicted of hate crimes for killing a black man in what prosecutors called a campaign to drive blacks from that neighborhood. And last January, authorities announced a crackdown on the 204th Street gang following the killing of a 14-year-old black girl.
The violence goes both ways, said Adam Torres, a Los Angeles County Sheriff's Department gang detective whose beat includes Florence-Firestone.
During a recent patrol on the east side of the neighborhood, he pointed to a cinderblock wall peppered with bullet holes. Torres said the Crips still control that area and any Hispanic there is at risk of being shot.
Despite the wave of violence, George Tita, a criminologist with the University of California, Irvine, said racially motivated gang killings are an exception. Latinos and blacks are far more likely to be murdered by one of their own.
"You don't see these major black-brown wars, either within the context of gangs or outside the context of gangs," Tita said.
Residents of Florence-Firestone are loath to discuss gangs, fearful they might end up as targets, but there are signs of change. Murders in the neighborhood dropped from 43 in 2005 to 19 in 2006, Baca said. For 2007, there were 19 murders as of Dec. 24.
Jose Garcia sees the difference. The security doors on the store where he works aren't covered with graffiti as often and he hasn't heard a gunshot in two months.
"It used to be at least once or twice a week," he said.
Geesh, do we have to call them "liberals?" I sometimes call myself liberal & if I have a single thing in common w. them other than our religion I'd be shocked.
If The Forward is hosting an event with her they should be ashamed of themselves. Are there other speakers in the series? I'd be curious who else is going to participate & whether there's any political balance.
You can't be a liberal and support Israeli policies. Simple as that. It's been true for decades.
LeaNder :
Some religous Jews do- others have a high degree of hatred for Christians – as do many East European jews in general – and don't give me some BS we were persecuted excuse because it goes back to the Talmud. If you want to know the extent of the abuse, ask a Christian priest or monk whose had the pleasure to serve in Jerusalem – on regular basis they literally spit on by religious jews while the police laugh.
What core values do they attack? At the same time the ACLU was suing to remove a cross from national parks they were suing to force tax payers to fund and elephant shit virgin mary (and I don't have to tell you who runs that museum – can we expect an elephant shit ann frank sometime soon?) That sums Jewish liberalism rather nicely.
Some, like Weiss are sincere about their liberalism – others -and a good litmus test is Israel – just use it to strengthen Jewish ethnic identity by attacking the core culture there
oops meant core culture here…
Otto: "You can't be a liberal and support Israeli policies. Simple as that. It's been true for decades."
Yet most Jews identify liberal and vote democratic.
To further emphasize my point – that most Jews are only liberal HERE because it attacks the core culture & dominant ethinic group here – however, they are dead set against policies of open immigration and multiculturalism for Israel.
"A couple of years ago, the Forward, the principal Jewish newspaper in the country, reported a remark made by Leonard Glickman, president and CEO of the Hebrew Immigrant Aid Society, in explaining why his organization was promoting the resettlement of Somali refugees in the United States: "The more diverse American society is the safer [Jews] are." Mr. Glickman is not alone.
Perhaps for much the same reason, Jewish neoconservatives like John Podhoretz, David Brooks and several others don't much like the very concept of an "Anglo Protestant core." "
http://www.vdare.com/francis/melted_pot.htm
Jews are just doing what is good for Jews, Which explains the duplicity.
To: me
have you checked out the Kevin MacDonald website?
I can recall Pat Buchanan debating the ACLU rep on Crossfire years ago. The ACLU guys piously defended the publicly funded anti-Christian exhibits. Finally, Pat simply said to the ACLU guy: ok suppose someone made fun of Ann Frank…" Well, the ACLU guy choked and almost fell apart.
Yup, Jews are engaging in an attack on Christian culture. It is working. However, I dont agree that it will be good for them in the long term but they think that it will be.
I see the Reichstag building keeps burning both here and in Israel. Goering and Goebbels must be laughing in their graves.
ANON,
I have read some of MacDonald's stuff. the 'theory' is not so interesting or provable but the documentation of behavior is what's of value.
No I don't think I will be good for them either. And many are discovering that, for example, 3rd world immigrants aren't so PC or easily guilt-tripped like whites, and in short don't fall for the BS of the ADL
Charles Keating is correct:
any criticism of America's elite that focuses on its large Jewish component is anti semitism per se.
No more discussion required.
It is 100% alright to point out if someone is Jewish if you are praising him or his culture. Otherwise, we will assume that you are a Nazi.
Now let me get back to Faux news. And remember they (the Islamic facists) hate us for our freedom not for what we do to Muslims.
To: me
are you seeing any data that mainstream Jews are turning against open borders? I am not seeing it…they are pretty insulated from its effects in affluent communities. They can afford to go "private" and buy their way past the problems that they advocate.
Do post some sources on the Jewish change of heart on open borders. I am not seeing it at all.
anon22
Nope no real change of heart – its interesting for example to see this guy try to talk some sense into them:
http://www.cis.org/articles/2001/back1301.html
but combination of arrogance and hatred leads to hubris. They're mad uncle irv didn't get into Yale in 1920, and still remember Moorish spain as a 'golden age' (though it wasn't so golden for Iberian Christians)
anon22 just remembered…
Borat is a good example of how out of touch they are – some argue that he didn't use muslim examples because he was afraid of violence, but just look at that film and how wildly it was promoted – all the stereotypes from Jewish folk memory – as Steve Sailer put it, I think. Totally out of touch with reality.
Anne Moses is a writer living in Baton Rouge, Louisiana. She is the author of the book Food and Whine: Confessions of a New Millennium Mom and more recently of the book we will be discussing this week: Bagels and Grits, A Jew on the Bayou.
In this memoir, Moses describes her disorienting move from Washington, D.C., to Baton Rouge, a city home to a small number of Jews. Moses, who had a strong Jewish identity but little connection to religious practice, found herself grappling with her new city's intense Christianity: Just about everyone was on intimate terms with Jesus. Moses's move to Baton Rouge, coupled with her mother's deteriorating health, prompted her to study Hebrew and celebrate her bat mitzvah, which she had not done as a girl (more about the book here).
Readers, as usual, can send their questions to rosnersdomain@haaretz.co.il.
Dear Jennifer,
In a dialogue I had a while ago with Zeev Chafetz, dealing with his book, A Match Made in Heaven, he wrote that "the Jewish community needs to change the way it disparages Evangelicals. You can disagree politically or culturally without ridiculing your opponents as bumpkins, bigots, anti-Semites or dunces."
And this is what you wrote in the Washington Post two years ago: "Being told 'Jesus loves you, baby,' by my favorite postal clerk doesn't offend me. Nor do I mind the billboards dotting the interstate ('Looking for a Sign from God? Here it is!') or the inclination of most of my neighbors to talk about their personal quests in terms of divine will." you also asked "what's the big deal if the fellows pray before the high school football game?" and said that "one common mistake liberals make is… equating this style of religiosity with something as simple as narrow-minded ignorance."
Do you think you both reflect the same sentiment? Does the Jewish community – mostly liberal – needs to change its attitude toward the Evangelical Christians of the Bible-belt and refrain from raising hell over religion in the public square and such matters?
Best
Rosner
On the theory that you catch more flies with honey than with vinegar, it's always a mistake to call your political opponents morons, nitwits, rednecks and so forth – unless you're a member of the British Parliament, and then you can say anything you want. But in America, people don't like being ridiculed, and therefore don't vote with the ridiculers. Meanwhile, liberals make the mistake, time and again, of seeing whole swaths of the country – such as the South, where I live – as being inhabited by people whose grandparents were still swinging from the trees. The other mistake that liberals, Jewish and otherwise, make is equating a deep Christian religiosity with bigotry or anti-Semitism. The truth is, most far-right Christians of the type who went for the current President Bush wouldn't know a Jew if he were davening mincha on Yom Kippur – and if anything, they're fervently pro-Israel, if only because, in their world-view, Israel must remain Jewish for the End Times to come. Bring on the red heifer. Crazy, perhaps. Imbued with simplistic Jesus fever – definitely. But anti-Semitic? Not usually.
Not that anti-Semitism doesn't continue to be something that Jews need to be vigilant about – of particular danger, in my view, are the lefty European intelligentsia, who have taken up the cause of the downtrodden Palestinians largely as an excuse to denounce Israel. American evangelicals, however, love Jews as well as Jewish Israel. They may love Jews for the "wrong" reasons (the Jewish role in hastening the End Days, as envisioned by the Book of Revelations) but they aren't going to start organizing pogroms any time soon.
What's far more common among the Christian faithful, particularly among both Southerners and Evangelicals, is what I think of as "the Christian assumption." The Christian assumption simply assumes that, unless you?re wearing a sari or a turban, you too are Christian. This world-view stems from a vast ignorance of the multiplicity of faiths, philosophies, and nationalities that comprise the American populace, plain and simple. It's enough to make a Jewish liberal scream in frustration, but it isn't anti-Semitism.
Nor is the Evangelical pattern, so prevalent in our time, of flocking to the church as a way out of the unholy and disgusting mess that has become American culture. From music videos to movies to rap music: it's enough to make you want to lose your lunch, unless of course you think thirteen-year-olds can learn from watching other thirteen-year-old fellate grown men on the silver screen. As Jews, we ought to be hand-in-hand with people who want to raise their children with the old-fashioned virtues of hard work, honesty, integrity, decency, and compassion.
And if, along the way, some stranger – the man who lets me go ahead of him in line at the Walmart, say – tells me to "have a blessed day," or "Merry Christmas," or even "Jesus loves you," I just can't get all bent out of shape about it.
That said, in my mind, all Americans, religious or not, ought to be raising hell around the clock in order to get God, in any way, shape, or form, out of the public square. In the South in particular there is a real blurring of the lines between the idea that Christians make up the majority of the American populace and the idea, often spoken, that "it's a Christian country." Thus the giant Christmas wreath that, as of this writing, hangs over the tax-supported public LSU law school in Baton Rouge; the Christian prayers before football games at public schools high schools; and the loathsome and largely hypocritical practice of pushing a strictly Christian agenda through the bullshit subterfuge of "intelligent design." This kind of non-Christian Christianity – the Christianity of might makes right – works people up and gets votes. But if Jews were half as smart as we think we are, we'd recognize that what motivates most of this anti-democratic religious fervor isn't hatred, but fear, and the cure for fear isn't high-handedness, but empathy.
InTheirOwnWords
If Congress really intended there to be separation of church and state please tell us why they had a chaplain and have had one for over 200 years.
You've clearly shown the Jewish hypocrisy – support of Israel – the Jewish state – no concern about getting Judism out of the public square, criticism of the jewish state as anti semitism, yet Christmas wreaths are some sort of threat to our freedom and should be banished from the public square.
Its this sort of shit that pisses us and is really starting to wear thin.
Me: I don't find your evidence convincing.
You are alluding to the Chris Ofili painting and the Saatchi collection?
I don't think that is a good example. Artist often use shock strategies to get attention.
I am not a fan of this trend:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Piss_Christ
But strictly it picks up a technique by Andy Warhol. Or his "piss" series, which produces surprising effects. And strictly you can consider it as mixed media. So I guess you have to consider the larger art historical context.
Concerning the settlers, that is a story I'd prefer not to go into …
Maybe all groups should be slightly more careful towards others. We had a huge protest here in Cologne concerning a thriller in the Tatort (scene of crime) series that enraged the Alevis community, since it contained one of the oldest prejudices against them in the larger Muslim community: Incest. Alevi women do not need to wear headscarfs; and in their communities men and women are equal which in turn led to the prejudice.
http://news.google.com/news?hl=en&tab=wn&ned=us&ie=UTF-8&ncl=1125577552
me – I don't exactly understand your anger at the Jews regarding separation of church and state. I don't want my tax money paying for any religious group's pagentry – Jewish, Christian, Hindu, or Muslim. I'll die to defend our rights to display our religious symbols on our own private property, but it does not belong in the PUBLIC square. Where and how is Judaism in the public square?
LeaNder
you're missing the point: Jews energetically supported this 'shock' – its fake shock because no artist would have ever gotten past the Jewish gatekeepers at the Brooklyn museum if they committed a similar blasphemy with the holocaust.
camille paglia titled an article on slate about it "why are jewish curators and jewish collectors supporting anti christian art" (or something like that, she wrote it in a more witty way) needless to say, slate killed it.
Consistently Jewish liberals support this sort of shit and at the same time are the first to yell 'hate speech' and support speech codes when someone criticizes them , or as Ruth Wisse asserts – criticizes Israel.
The UK's important Turner Prize has gone this year to 30-year-old British painter of Nigerian origin, Chris Ofili. Organized by the Tate Gallery in London, the £20,000 ($35,000) prize, sponsored by Channel 4, was presented by agnès b., clothes designer and gallery owner.
Best known for his paintings using elephant dung, Ofili remarked during a radio interview at the award ceremony that the important thing was to know whether art was "good art or bad art" and not whether it contained elephant dung. He is, nonetheless, reported to have used this ingredient in all his works so far (almost a guarantee of authenticity), the original smuggled in from Africa, with subsequent needs coming from London's Zoo and dried in an airing cupboard. Quite what effects the ingredient will have on the longevity of Ofili's works will come to light in due course. One female visitor to the exhibition, interviewed prior to the prize award, commented that "those works (Ofili's) over there are total kitsch", and one Australian visitor bemusedly speculated on the effects an invasion of dung beatles might take (blankets turned into lace?).
The Turner Prize is the Tate Gallery's major, highly orchestrated, media event of the year, "intended to promote public discussion of the developments in contemporary British art." The choice of the prize winner is always controversial, hopefully keeping (for the Tate) chins ever-wagging, and (for us) the message of art ever-advancing through the works of contemporary artists. This did not stop one British town council from demolishing Rachel Whiteread's 1993 award (an inner-casting in concrete of a derelict house) because it did not have planning permission.
One important factor for the artists is that, apart from its straightforward cash benefit, the Turner Prize has an immediate influence on the cachet they command in the market. This has led critics to describe the award as art market hype rather than an art award per se.
Manchester-born Ofili comes out of the Chelsea School of Art with a masters degree from the Royal College of Art, London, and has exhibited frequently in Britain, continental Europe and America. His solo exhibition at the Southampton City Art Gallery this year has already done the rounds of London's up-market scato-trendy Serpentine Gallery (remember the tins of Pier Manzoni's "Merda d'Artista" selected by Julia Peyton-Jones for the gallery's reopening last February?), before its current viewing at the Manchester City Art Gallery.
Shortlisted for the inventiveness, exuberance, humour and technical richness of his painting, it is Ofili's dynamic use of colour and the originality, energy and complexity of his work, with its multilayered references to contemporary urban culture and awareness of the history of art which won him the jury's acclaim and the prize. Ofili's work No Woman No Cry, painted during the inquiry into race relations in Britain triggered by the unsolved murder of Stephen Lawrence, a London student killed in a racist attack, is a compelling example of his multilayering technique and commentary on urban culture. Other works such as The Adoration of Captain Shit and the Legend of the Black Stars (Part 2) 1998 and Afrodizzia (2nd version) 1998 illustrate Ofili's references to art history, the Bible, hip hop music or the stereotype of black sexual potency. A total of ten works by Ofili are on view – six large paintings and four water colours – with works by other finalists, Tacita Dean, Cathy de Monchaux and Sam Taylor-Wood, until 10 January 1999 at the Tate. The show is drawing record crowds.Take a look for yourself.
Chris Ofili considers himself a devout Catholic.
Another interesting cultural divide: Jews – who have little or no visual tradition and have high verbal iqs, are drawn to abstract, modern art -and often garish architecture – stuff you can talk about – not look at – while WASPs tend to be drawn to and support realism. Stuff you can look at – but not really talk much about.
So Radical Chic, why not 'shocking' images mocking what is sacred to Jews -the Holocaust?
Oh, that's illegal in most European countries. As Ahmadinejad said you can mock God but not Jews.
good point ME…mockery of Jews is verboten!
It is also verboten to:
discuss the Jewish role in their own holocaust,
supporting Hitler's rise,
breaking the anti Nazi embargo c.f. The Transfer Agreement….
quote from the Jews against Zionism" website.
…you need much re-education!!
"me" – What do you propose for something shocking about the holocaust?
How about dung all over this picture?
http://shamash.org/holocaust/photos/images/Belsen01.jpg
Would you be happy if we took a pee on this photo?
http://shamash.org/holocaust/photos/images/EG1.jpg
Maybe something glamorizing these SS women?
http://shamash.org/holocaust/photos/images/SS-Women.jpg
Just let us know what you like and we will prepare it for you since you are so keen on having them and it is not really "sacred" to us.
Mason
I doubt you or any liberal nihilist would die for anything – please, that's cocktail party talk, and its why France and other atheistic countries will soon find themselves with sharia law.
Anyway, again, where does it say separation of church and state in the constitution? Why did they and why do they have a chaplain then?
By what authority other than your own, do you say they should be removed? If you are so phobic and so neurotic that you actually think putting up a Christmas tree or even a nativity scene is akin to establishing the papacy then I suggest you seek counseling.
you are missing the point, again when you write:
"Where and how is Judaism in the public square?"
Jews here aggressively support removing Christmas trees, ect. but also support "the jewish state" of Israel – and have no problem with that. if they really believed in separation of church and state they would not be such enthusiastic supporters of Israel.
Radical Chic , so it is sacred to you, right? you would never think of mocking that but you have no problem mocking Christian and Muslim symbols, am I correct?
I am not keen on mocking those symbols I am pointing out Jewish hypocrisy.
me – I'm sure I'm not the first person to say to you that you're full of dung.
http://www.flickr.com/photos/amitai/sets/72057594067999377/
oh and Radical Chic, one more thing, I find it humorous that you an others still think you're 'shocking' the establishment – as I think you've proven you wouldn't have the guts to really shock and challenge 'the establishment' and it's this fake posturing i find tiresome and hypocritical. Oh WOW you're pissing off souther baptists -how BRAVE of you…try pissing off the ADL then watch what happens.
radical chic, there isn't one truly shocking or challenging image there.
where were all the jewish liberal free speech types when IRan had this:
http://irancartoon.com/120/holocaust/index.htm
?? Where were the neocons and free speech champions.
"Totally out of touch with reality."
That's were we misunderstand them. Human-defined "reality" is not the same thing as Nature's laws. It is far more bendable. If one feels out of touch with reality one may simply try to change reality itself.
I think is more or less an established understanding that judaism is based on fear. As such it is an unstable mindset which depends a lot on control features (hence the natural tendency for authoritarianism) and has as central element the "Enemy", any enemy. [Before you associate instability with an absolute negative conotation let me remind you that unstable systems are wondrously manouverable (when properly controlled) - in a sense they are always on the brink, so to speak.]
I don't want to extend my monologue, but how does one change a stable reality (fit for courage and wonder) into an unstable one (fit for fear and isolation): spread mistrust.
"I fear, therefore I am, but you should not."
By the way, the blind rabbical chiken, though ugly and wicked reminds-me of this passage:
"In his Book 'Stalin: Court of the Red Star', Jewish historian Sebag Montefiore writes that during the darkest period of terror, when the Communist killing machine worked in full force, Stalin was surrounded by beautiful, young Jewish women."
Phil Weiss writes – "Abe Foxman, who has opposed recognition of the Armenian genocide, is also on the Forward's list."
Here is the ADL's statement regarding this matter:
In light of the heated controversy that has surrounded the Turkish-Armenian issue in recent weeks, and because of our concern for the unity of the Jewish community at a time of increased threats against the Jewish people, ADL has decided to revisit the tragedy that befell the Armenians.
We have never negated but have always described the painful events of 1915-1918 perpetrated by the Ottoman Empire against the Armenians as massacres and atrocities. On reflection, we have come to share the view of Henry Morgenthau, Sr. that the consequences of those actions were indeed tantamount to genocide. If the word genocide had existed then, they would have called it genocide.
I have consulted with my friend and mentor Nobel Laureate Elie Wiesel and other respected historians who acknowledge this consensus. I hope that Turkey will understand that it is Turkey's friends who urge that nation to confront its past and work to reconcile with Armenians over this dark chapter in history.
Having said that, we continue to firmly believe that a Congressional resolution on such matters is a counterproductive diversion and will not foster reconciliation between Turks and Armenians and may put at risk the Turkish Jewish community and the important multilateral relationship between Turkey, Israel and the United States.
We must encourage steps to create an atmosphere in which Armenia will respond favorably to the several recent overtures of Turkey to convene a joint commission to assist the parties in achieving a resolution of their profound differences. We believe there are many renowned historians, human rights activists and distinguished world leaders who are willing to lend their knowledge, experience and judgment to this cause. We know that earlier this year, Professor Elie Wiesel and more than 50 of his fellow Nobel Laureates called for concrete steps to be taken by Turkey and Armenia to find a way forward to reach the goal of reconciliation, and that, last week, Professor Wiesel reaffirmed his support for efforts to create a body in which both Turkish and Armenian experts can come together to work cooperatively in re-examining the shared past of both peoples.
The force and passion of the debate today leaves us more convinced than ever that this issue does not belong in a forum such as the United States Congress.
The proper role of those of us who deeply believe the controversy must be resolved is to promote and support Turkey and Armenia in efforts to bring them together to begin the process of reconciliation. Although independent scholars may have reached a consensus about the genocide, in an effort to help accomplish the reconciliation there is room for further dispassionate scholarly examination of the details of those dark and terrible days.
ADL and the American Jewish community should focus their attention on supporting efforts to urge Turkey and Armenia to make this happen.
"The force and passion of the debate today leaves us more convinced than ever that this issue does not belong in a forum such as the United States Congress.
"
But the Jewish holocaust does, and we need memorials in every major american city , taxpayer funded.
Agree.
Now it is true that most Jews have very liberal and progressive beliefs and they do vote that way.
The trouble is that being pro Israel trumps all other concerns for todays majority of Jews in America, and indeed the world.
For the sake of supporting Israel, Jews suddenly are pro torture (in Israel).
For the sake of supporting Israel, Jews are anti immigration (in Israel).
For the sake of supporting Israel, Jews are A-OK with fanatical religious wackos (in Israel – think settlements, and unfortunately in USA also… think the weird christian rapture cults which support Israel based on some weird religious notions).
My point is, that while Jews are mostly liberal and progressive, they switch their position in a heartbeat IF it doesn't support Israel.
Americangoy – you seem to want to be taken seriously, so perhaps you could clarify your statements above.
"For the sake of supporting Israel, Jews suddenly are pro torture (in Israel)."
What percentage of American Jews are for torture in Israel and under what conditions are American Jews pro-torture in Israel?
"For the sake of supporting Israel, Jews are anti immigration (in Israel)."
How are Amerian Jews anti-immigration to Israel and in the cases where they are anti-immigration what are the reasons?
"For the sake of supporting Israel, Jews are A-OK with fanatical religious wackos (in Israel – think settlements, and unfortunately in USA also… think the weird christian rapture cults which support Israel based on some weird religious notions)."
What percentage of American Jews supportfanatical religious wackos here and in Israel. Please be specific about who you are speaking of here.
Americangoy – If you want to just make blanket statements about groups of people that have little value to them because they lack any specificity then by all means continue as you are, but if you wish to actually make a contribution to the discussion, please specify.
"What percentage of American Jews supportfanatical religious wackos here and in Israel. Please be specific about who you are speaking of here."
I'm sure you personally don't attend CUFI meetings, Alan. The question you should be asking yourself is what percentage of American Jews have ever spoken out against Israeli practices, and in particular, against the U.S. aid that has made those practices possible. It's an entirely fair generalization to say that the American Jewish community has indeed supported all the racist practices of Zionism, including the ones that I'm sure even you would claim to condemn, such as torture, collective punishment, human shields, denial of medical treatment, targeted assassinations, the killing of children, etc.
Surely you allow yourself to discuss something called "the Jewish community," even though there are always individual exceptions?
Comments on this entry are closed.