In England, Palestinian cause draws Gwyneth, Kate, other celebs

Here's a piece in the London gossips on the Hoping Foundation– "an organization that is dedicated to showing Palestinian refugee
children that their struggle to transform their lives is encouraged and
supported by people in Britain and throughout the rest of the world." Writes Anees of Jerusalem:
I found out about the HOPING Foundation over two
years ago, from a Guardian interview with Massive Attack (a band), who were throwing concerts in the UK to benefit them. It was
founded by Bella Freud (Sigmund's great granddaughter), a fashion
designer
and Karma Nabulsi, an
Oxford professor and ex PLO member.
It's shocking to me it's happened at all!
Who would believe that celebrities like Gwyneth Paltrow and Kate Moss
were singing for Palestine?But yeah, I do believe it has a much slimmer chance of happening in the US.

I think this is a post about culture. American popular culture and the significance of Jews in making it. Don't want to step on their toes. But that's changing.

Posted in Israel/Palestine

{ 35 comments... read them below or add one }

  1. jewlicious says:

    Who would take offense to a charity for children? Palestinian or otherwise? This was a nice charity event and you just had to bring the Jews into it.

  2. Strahl says:

    Why is it that Zionists always straw man the opposing argument? Are you saying Jews do not have a powerful effect on American culture? Instead you cry wolf. Although, seeing as how you're from Jewlicious, that anti-intellectualism when it comes to criticisms of Jewishness, it's not very surprising.

  3. Strahl says:

    We have the social pressures of being called racists and bigots in a multicultural country such as ours. However, not all races are given the same amount of understanding and certainly not the same amount of energy and passion allocated for their defense. Arabs and Islam are a perfect example. Jews and Judaism is another. The Israel Lobby was a breakthrough in exposing Jewish tribal behavior and that deep hypocrisy within the Zionist movement (historical amnesia/etc.). And typically, tribal Jews (who logically could easily be interchangeable with Zionists) will be hyper-sensitive to all things Jewish while not blinking once when they put out their trashy DVDs on 'The Third Jihad' or 'Obsession: Radical Islam's blah blah with the West' and other assorted nonsense.

  4. jewlicious says:

    Strahl: Of course Jews have had a powerful influence on American culture. But why harp on it? The Hoping Foundation does important work on behalf of Palestinian children. Focus should be on that and not on the nefarious influence that the Zionist Lobby wields on American minds via the rap music of Ol' Dirty Bastard and the cinematic oeuvre of Adam Sandler or whatever. As for the rest of your comments, frankly Jewlicious' anti-intellectualism is by necessity and not by design. I simply have no clue what you're talking about. Too much use of multi-syllabic words I suppose. ;)

  5. American says:

    Jews are in it because of the Jews who are responsible for what has been done,is being done by Israel, "the Jewish State," to these children. Are you daft? Jews=Israel, Israel=Jews, Jews=Israel…is what Jews have shoved down the world's throat for 60 years. Don't blame us if we believe it.

  6. American says:

    If our current dumbed downed, mostly tastless and slezzy popular culture was created by Jews as Phil says, it's time to demote them to something more suitable to their talents.

  7. Tenma says:

    It's amazing to watch people step up, one by one, to support the liberation of Palestine. It's also surprising to see who steps up. Who would ever guess, for instance, that Michael Moore would dedicate a book to Rachel Corrie?

  8. RichardWitty says:

    People want to do good. I don't think that Gwynneth Paltrow would want to get embroiled in Palestinian solidarity if Hamas was still blowing up buses and restaurants, and the more activity solidarity was saying "We support the right of the Palestinian people to armed insurrection. They are the ones that are oppressed, you know." Its good that the shelling of Sderot has stopped, and voluntarily. Otherwise, you'd have to enforce the boycott so extremely, so that artists wouldn't then have the odd experience of going to Israel's new wave music capital and have to perform in bomb shelters to hide from the rockets coming from the community that they are playing in solidarity for.

  9. roGER says:

    Gwynneth, Kate, and many many many other British people have been pro-Palestinian for years, Richard. Why do you wear your ignorance like a badge of honour? Is it because it makes the defence and excuse of Israeli war crimes and theft easier?

  10. Strahl says:

    This is my point. You do not want to discuss Jewish power. You characterize any discussion on it as 'harping'. But it's all related. And again, you keep straw manning. And I'm not saying Jewish intellectuals 'control' the culture but are simply a powerful contributor to it. Easily the most powerful ethnic group in our country with plenty of ideological cards to play (Hitler/Holocaust/Nazis/Jewish suffering in general) for political reasons. Have you ever read 'Manufacturing Consent'? Chomsky takes a materialist stance on the propaganda model. There is collusion between what the media's general subservience to the State when it comes to foreign policy and interests of a particular ethnic group. In that regard, I would state that it's unfair to say Jewish power is the sole reason for how lop-sided our coverage is of the ME conflict. But 'Jewish identity' itself is a powerful social pressure. In general, there isn't an honest debate on American foreign policy or race and religion. With the history of Jewish suffering, it's simply taboo to think Jews could be anything other than victims. Just look at the reactions in the mainstream to Jimmy Carter's book, Palestine: Pease not Apartheid.

  11. Strahl says:

    When was the last suicide bombing? When did suicide bombing begin? Why? I doubt anyone with some moral fiber would hold it against he PALESTINIAN PEOPLE for what these militant nationalists do when they educate themselves on the conflict and compare the historiography of various authors with the facts. When you begin to compare violence. When you put violence in context. When you factor in the daily life of both groups and why that is so. Etc. Essentially when you learn about the conflict, you do not buy into these appeals to emotion or pity that you keep espousing Witty. It's dishonest. If we're going to judge the parties to this conflict by violent acts against civilians, Palestinians always come out looking better than the Zionists. And furthermore, when you put Hamas attacks in context to all other actions by militant nationalists throughout history as well as reconciling the early history of this conflict and the emergence of these tactics to the present manifestation – Hamas is yet again (as with all the other Palestinian resistance groups) more reasonable than the Zionists. This is about judging relative injustices with a standard of reciprocity and fairness and practicality in relation to historical trends of behavior. Only you would isolate Hamas terrorism. This is your standard straw man.

  12. morris says:

    A short video of Zionist views from a Jewish neighbourhood of London: ” target=”_blank”>http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=a5xOL4sRIyo

  13. carnas says:

    Please share with us the context of Hamas' suicide bombings in the mid-1990's, at the height of the Oslo Process and when Rabin was prime minister.

  14. Citizen says:

    Eight minute debate between non-Zionist and Zionist on reality of ethnic cleansing, morality of it; raising the core question: why is this debate kept a secret by Western governments? Who keeps this crucial issue from the public? ” target=”_blank”>http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3JUejZmEaUc&fe…

  15. RichardWitty says:

    The 90's and early 2000's suicide bombings were an attempt to stop the Oslo process. Hamas wanted NO reconciliation on any grounds at any border. They also were also attempting to present themselves as leaders within the Palestinian community, you know "heroes". Its the kind of thing that mellow Gwynneth Paltrow and others would stay away from. Even committed activists would have to stop their public expressions of solidarity. Shelling civilians in Sderot is a milder form of terror, but terror still for its INTENTIONAL targeting of civilians.

  16. RichardWitty says:

    I've been pro-Palestinian rights for fourty years. I've NEVER been pro-terror as a means. I doubt that Gwynneth Paltrow is.

  17. RichardWitty says:

    It will always be noble to help children.

  18. moonkoon says:

    This just in… Fear stalks geopolitical analytical community. Dateline. Cyberspace, Thursday. In an explosive and revealing interview, Chas Freeman, speaking in his own voice (and who, incidentally, and not wishing to influence anyone's opinion, was recently accused of hating Israel, – tsk, tsk, and shilling for the Wahhabis, ditto, (he was also reported to have a home fax but that has not yet been confirmed)) has raised the alarm about the widespread but ignored apprehension that is spreading like swine flu throughout the analytical community. It is feared that authorities have pulled down the shutters on analysis that does not coincide with the mumbo jumbo currently being blared, Gitmo like, 24/7 at the nation's leaders by "belief" tanks. The situation is reported to be serious. Freeman went on to mourn the loss of value-free analysis to what can only be described as a flood intelligence insulting, self-serving, rent seeking, garbage that pours unchecked from these agenda driven belief tanks. Seasoned observers have expressed dismay at the media's incredible capacity to "run dead" on the issue. more to follow… ” target=”_blank”>http://mpegmedia.abc.net.au/rn/podcast/2009/06/ln… P. S. A shill is an associate of a person selling goods or services or a political group, who pretends no association to the seller/group and assumes the air of an enthusiastic customer. The intention of the shill is, using crowd psychology, to encourage others unaware of the set-up to purchase said goods or services or support the political group's ideological claims. -wiki

  19. RichardWitty says:

    And your sure that Charles Freeman isn't also that.

  20. Citizen says:

    Accordingly, here's an analysis of Christian Zionist mentality and way: ” target=”_blank”>http://cp.whtt.org/index.php?news=2&id=3132

  21. Mister Ross says:

    I had no problem; now I'm right down the hall from the POTUS. Check out my affiliations and credentials for my job.

  22. MRW says:

    Very interesting article.

  23. Strahl says:

    Witty, I agree that it IS terror. I'm not whitewashing the crime – I'm simply comparing both sides acts of injustice and putting the violence in context. And what is the conclusion? When you compare Israeli aggression to the use of terrorism by the Palestinian resistance, well? It's like I said, the Palestinians will look better. This cannot be the measure of how strong the solidarity with the Palestinians will be. It's only when people forget the history and the context and view each act of violence as an isolated incident. Now, being practical, I actually agree with you that someone mellow and no doubt superficially interested like a celebrity or musician (probably a stereotype here tho..) would be alienated by Hamas's use or terrorism.

  24. Shafiq says:

    Hmm….I don't know, something about an occupation maybe? Building of Colonial outposts in both Gaza and the West Bank at record levels? The Cave of Patriarchs massacre?

  25. MRW says:

    It helps that Jemima Khan is in there. She was Jemima Goldsmith before she converted to Islam when she married Imran Khan. See ” target=”_blank”>http://pulsemedia.org/2009/06/25/imran-khan-on-us… Jemima Is the daughter of Lady Annabel and James Goldsmith.

  26. Shafiq says:

    I'm assuming you shot the footage here. How many anti-Zionist Jews did you find in London? Most of the British Jews I've met have been strongly anti-Zionist. Oh yeah, and Phil, please don't use England and the UK interchangeably – 3 other nations do collectively make up the UK. I know it seems petty but it can be quite annoying. As a general rule, use the term UK

  27. MRW says:

    From that article:

    [...] The Christians must pray for Israel tract contains a list of 39 bible references, 14 from the book of Romans.  Its unnamed author claims that all these passages support the assumption that the new political state of Israel is a fulfillment of God’s plan.  They do not.  Unfortunately the reader must read each passage in its own context to find the error.  The Judeo-Christian amalgamation depends upon the reader not reading.  In the interest of brevity I will answer those from Romans.4 I ask a simple question. Who or what did Judeo-Christians think “Israel” was pre-1947, before there was a political state of Israel?   If “Israel” of the bible today means the present day State of Israel, what did it mean a hundred years before there was such a State?  It should be obvious that Israel meant then, and still means, one of the three contexts in which Paul used it, none of which was a place or a state.
 
The Christian New Testament answers this vital question many times, stating again and again that those who follow Christ are the New Covenant sons of Abraham.  It is uncontested by Christians, Muslims, and Torah Jews that the man “Israel” was the grandson of Abraham.  All but Jews believe from his linage the Messiah was to come.  In Galatians 3:28-29, Apostle Paul stated: There is neither Jew nor Greek, there is neither bond nor free, there is neither male nor female: for ye are all one in Christ Jesus.   And if ye be Christ's, then are ye Abraham's seed, and heirs according to the promise. Whoops, the Christian Zionist track lists this passage, but it conveniently leaves off the last sentence about those who belong to Jesus being the sons of Abraham and heirs to the promise, the new Israel of God. Why is this part left off by Judeo-Christians?  Because it refutes the notion that modern, political Israel is God's chosen people. [...]

  28. MRW says:

    Moonkoon, that's a GREAT link. Chas Freeman describes how the Lobby got rid of him: ” target=”_blank”>http://mpegmedia.abc.net.au/rn/podcast/2009/06/ln… Something about the replies to your post is now screwed up. Citizen noted this link, which is ultra-fascinating: Christian Scripture: The Zionist Deception ” target=”_blank”>http://cp.whtt.org/index.php?news=2&id=3132 And I put this up from that article Citizen referenced:

    [...] The Christians must pray for Israel tract contains a list of 39 bible references, 14 from the book of Romans.  Its unnamed author claims that all these passages support the assumption that the new political state of Israel is a fulfillment of God’s plan.  They do not.  Unfortunately the reader must read each passage in its own context to find the error.  The Judeo-Christian amalgamation depends upon the reader not reading.  In the interest of brevity I will answer those from Romans.4 I ask a simple question. Who or what did Judeo-Christians think “Israel” was pre-1947, before there was a political state of Israel?   If “Israel” of the bible today means the present day State of Israel, what did it mean a hundred years before there was such a State?  It should be obvious that Israel meant then, and still means, one of the three contexts in which Paul used it, none of which was a place or a state.
  The Christian New Testament answers this vital question many times, stating again and again that those who follow Christ are the New Covenant sons of Abraham.  It is uncontested by Christians, Muslims, and Torah Jews that the man “Israel” was the grandson of Abraham.  All but Jews believe from his linage the Messiah was to come.  In Galatians 3:28-29, Apostle Paul stated: There is neither Jew nor Greek, there is neither bond nor free, there is neither male nor female: for ye are all one in Christ Jesus.   And if ye be Christ's, then are ye Abraham's seed, and heirs according to the promise. Whoops, the Christian Zionist track lists this passage, but it conveniently leaves off the last sentence about those who belong to Jesus being the sons of Abraham and heirs to the promise, the new Israel of God. Why is this part left off by Judeo-Christians?  Because it refutes the notion that modern, political Israel is God's chosen people. [...]

  29. paulmalfara says:

    Richard Witty is spinning more bullshit!!! He is pro-colonialist encroacher (sorry, I can't say "settler", it sounds too benign) rights, that's right, the 500,000 or so, growing by the day. How many colonial encroachers were there in the West Bank and East Jerusalem 40 years ago, Witty? How many encroachers were there 20 years ago, Witty? How many encroachers were there 14 years ago Witty? Why weren't you standing up for your "pro-Palestinian rights" then Witty? And why, when someone mentions the encroachers, do you dissemble and mumble something about the fact that removing the encroachers would be ethnic cleansing? As if removing people who have lived on the land of the Palestinians for less than a generation have some connection to it, perhaps because the Israeli government or American oligarchs subsidized their colonial outposts. You are a bullshitter, Richard. PM

  30. paulmalfara says:

    As far as your terror goes, please read Steinbeck's "The Moon is Down", and remember. There is no terrorism in the defense of your home against an occupation. "Conquest after conquest, deeper and deeper into molasses. Flies conquer the flypaper! Flies conquered two hundred miles of new flypaper!!" PM

  31. JoachimMartillo says:

    Jews will always trump Palestinian suffering with Jewish suffering unless critics of Zionism and Jewish behavior in general introduce a Culture of Critique directed specifically against Zionist and Jewish mendacity: Collection: Chief Zionist Frauds.

  32. JoachimMartillo says:

    In Epic Encounters Melani McAlister makes the point persuasively that pop culture defines the perception of national interests and therefore US international foreign policy. To change US foreign policy and break the stranglehold that racist Jewish Zionists have over the US government, patriotic Americans have to identify the key Zionist and Jewish lies that have so much power in the USA: Collection: Chief Zionist Frauds. Only in this way can the USA be saved from deadly Jewish Zionist parasitization: Saving America in 100 words.

  33. JoachimMartillo says:

    As usual Witty is misrepresenting the facts. I was working in the OT during the 90s. As soon as lots of former Soviet Jews began to arrive, the Israeli government decided it did not need the Oslo Process because it felt it could win the demographic war. Thus conditions for Palestinians were progressively worsened under the Oslo Process and the last thing Palestinians saw from the Israeli government was any sort of attempt at reconciliation from the State of Israel. The Barukh Goldstein went on his rampage. Instead of the removing the Zionist squatters from Hebron/El-Khalil and surroundings, the Israeli government cracked down on Palestinians: Stephen Walt: Talking to Hamas. Hamas drew the obvious conclusions about Zionist lies as should patriotic Americans in dealing with Jewish Zionist subversives.

  34. planetmichelle says:

    maybe those idiots in Sderot should consider moving. Witty. Even a civilian who builds a house on my property is asking for trouble, and anyone who felt sorry for them should invite them to build on their property. If you were really their friend you would advise it.

  35. planetmichelle says:

    yep, but Mathatma Ghandi brought that point home to them and still they dance around it without answering to it.