The lobby is splitting. J Street is taking the Obama Jews (most of 'em, I bet; but younger and poorer), and AIPAC and the Conference of Presidents are holding the Netanyahu Jews. Older, moneyed, more conservative. Malcolm Hoenlein of the Conference of Presidents of Major Jewish Organizations, interviewed by Newsmax, attacked Obama's Cairo speech, then embraced a Netanyahu-like religious agenda for the Holy Land.
Hoenlein notes the [Cairo] speech included a number of troubling references and
comparisons. He cites the fact that Obama claimed America has seven million
Muslims. That is a figure "Arab propagandists have put out," he says.
"In fact, they say only six million, when in fact there’s no study
that shows even half of that."
In 2007, the Pew Research Center estimated the Muslim American population at
2.35 million.
Hoenlein is disturbed that Obama did not mention the Jewish people’s
ancient connection with the land of Israel.
"There was no reference to the 3,000 years of Jewish connection to this
land," Hoenlein says. "And that is again one of the propaganda lines
that the Arabs have used: that the Jews are interlopers, that the two temples
never existed, that there was never any Jewish history in the land of Israel.
Even Yasser Arafat and others have used that argument because they’re
trying to deny the legitimacy of the Jewish state. I don’t believe that
was the president’s intent, but not making those references I think is
troubling."
Jews have claimed a connection to the land of their forefathers since 1400
B.C. Even after the Roman destruction of the Second Temple in 70 A.D. and the
dispersal of many Jews throughout the Roman Empire, many Jews continued to
reside in Jerusalem through the centuries, surviving various invasions. An
Ottoman census of Jerusalem conducted in 1845 showed Jews outnumbered Muslim
Arabs by almost to 2 to 1 and were the dominant ethnic group in the region.
Yes, darling, and Theodor Herzl promised the Sultan of Turkey in 1902 that he wasn't going to try and take over Jerusalem, even while he was intriguing to get the Sinai. (Herzl was seeking a refuge for European Jews from anti-Semitism. Now when anti-Semitism means little in young Jews' lives, we should make it clear that we're happy where we are.)
Myself, I don't like it when religious fundamentalists bring the bible into politics. It seems like Hoenlein got the speech he wanted from Netanyahu, who mentioned the "Jewish people" and their right to the Holy Land a dozen times in his speech, and portrayed the Palestinians as interlopers. Hoenlein's interviewer is author Ron Kessler. I wonder whether he's got a religious agenda too.
Imagine if every ethnic group went back a few centuries and claimed the land they lived on back then–Nice?
The article repeats the headline maybe four times – that major Jewish leaders, even those who support him, are concerned about Obama's Cairo speech, before it begins trying – ineffectually – to document that assertion. This isn't journalism. It's an effort to use "Jewish Opinion" to intimidate. It's as offensive intellectually as Anti-Semitic generalizations about Jews.
Ygh. You mean I have been making mortgage payments on someone else's land? For some reason, I suspect Mr. Hoenlein would not be a sympathetic to a Native American asking for the keys to Mr. Hoenlein's house.
"An Ottoman census of Jerusalem conducted in 1845 showed Jews outnumbered Muslim Arabs by almost to 2 to 1 and were the dominant ethnic group in the region". Well yes, you can make the Jewish population the "dominant ethnic group in the region", if you limit "the region" to that very very small part of PaIestine – ie Jerusalem's Old City, where most pre-Zionist Palestinian Jews lived. By the same logic, my immediate family makes up the dominant demographic group in Southern Maryland, so long as you limit your census to only the people who live in my house. I don't know exactly what 1845 Ottoman Census Hoenlein is referring to. Schwarz's "Das Heilige Land", published in 1852, was based on an unofficial count of the Jewish population in Jerusalem made in 1845, and it estimated the number to be about 8,000, which would certainly be the majority religious group in Jerusalem at that time. Maybe this is the source of the 2:1 ratio Hoenlein refers to. But wherever he got his numbers, he's doing a bit of cherry picking by failing to mention the context in which that Jewish population existed. I think the closest Ottoman census of Palestine to that date would be that of 1850/1, which found the total population to be (rounded numbers) 340,000: 300,000 Muslims, 27,000 Christians and 13,000 Jews. So that 8,000 in Jerusalem represents the majority of all the Jews in Palestine who, collectively, made up just 3.4 per cent of the population. It's a little dishonest to separate out that part of Jerusalem where the Jewish population of Palestine was concentrated, and ignore the rest of the picture, just so you can pretend that this tiny Jewish enclave in an overwhelmingly Arab, Muslim Palestine somehow represents "the dominant ethnic group in the region".
I hope one day that Obama will address the institutional bigotry in the Democratic Party, given that only 1.7% of Dems in the US Senate are African American when they comprise over 13% of the country and consistently vote in support of the Democratic Party at rates higher than any other minority, whereas around 20% of Dems in the US Senate are Jewish Zionists even though Jews comprise well under 2% of the US population. My theory is that the Democratic Party is institutionally biased in favor of Jews, and against African Americans, and Obama was quickly thrust to the top in order paper over the problem of Jewish supremacist racism in the Democratic Party, which has adamantly supported Zionist racism for decades. This canard that Obama is a freakishly talented politician is total boloney, as there are thousands of talented blacks out there who could easily hold their own against these racist Jews in the Senate. But they’re never promoted, whereas Jews are, due to the upper Party’s bias in favor of Jews.
An addition to Diane's coment on the census, showing another convenient obfuscation by Hoenlein: I am not sure of the validity of Hoenlein's census citation or its origin, but if he got it from Wikipedia (< a HREF="link to en.wikipedia.org
then Hoenlein neglects to count or mention the Christian Arab inhabitants, who are Palestinian Arabs. But oh—he talks of identity in terms of religion only and not in terms of socio-cultural bonds, and here leaving out Christians seems convenient to him. (Muslims and Christians have been living together in Palestine for a few centuries, speak the same language—and they bore the brunt of the Nakba equally.) If he had talked about Jerusalem 'Arabs', then in that particular citation they outnumber its 'Jews'. Religious identities suck, and so do people who argue in those terms. Especially when it's in order to defend a colonialist project.
The historical presence of Jews there is a basis of sentiment to settle in the land if legally. The return to Zion is a valid and important motivation. But perfected title is not constructed by sentiment or decree.
Besides, the Jews in Jerusalem back then were almost entirely Arabs anyway, and not looking to establish any ethnic-nationalist state. The whole "Arab or Jew" argument is nothing more than a false dichotomy perpetrated by Zionist bigots.
I find it odd how Zionists so often resort to arguing via vaguely coherent statements in outline format. I am guessing it is some side effect of the indoctrination causing such a unique display of cognitive dissonance, and wonder if psychologists have ever bothered to study the phenomena. It reminds me of various movies where computers are faced with impossible questions and start spitting out random lines of information as they short circuit. There would be historical value in creating a collection of such responses for their artistic merit, being arguably it's own deranged form of poetry.
Or Mexico asked for Arizona, California, Texas, New Mexico, and huge chucks of Utah, Nebraska, and Kansas back. After all, our ownership is only 160 years old.
You're wrong, Ed. He is a "freakishly talented politician" and history will prove him so. You're weighing in after five months in office, which doesn't make your opinion anymore valuable or correct than mine. However, I made my decision to vote for him based on what he did in the Chicago legislature and the US Senate, not on what he promised to do as President.
RE: Hoenlein says Obama parroted Muslim 'propaganda' SEE ALSO: “Obama Breeds Climate of Hate Against Jews”, By Rabbi Dr. Morton H. Pomerantz, 06/10/09 (EXCERPT) Our new president did not tell a virulent anti-Semite to travel to the U.S. Holocaust Memorial Museum in Washington to kill Jews, but he is most certainly creating a climate of hate against us. It is no coincidence that we are witnessing this level of hatred toward Jews as President Barack Obama positions America against the Jewish state. Just days ago Obama traveled to Cairo, Egypt. It was his second trip in a short time to visit Muslim countries. He sent a clear message by not visiting Israel. But this was code. In Cairo, Obama said things that pose a grave danger to Jews in Israel, in America and everywhere… ENTIRE ‘SCREED*’ – http://www.newsmax.com/headlines/obama_holocaust_... *SCREED – h/t Prof. Dershowitz
Not to mention Nevada as well.
Good point Kyle
Interesting statistics that does make one wonder about the reasons why in our U.S. Senate, the African American community is so underrepresented as compared to its number count, and why the Jewish American community is so overrepresented as compared its their number count…What is the case in our U.S. Congress? I would think it is because the Jewish people tend to have more money and better positions(such as lot's of law degrees, which by the way is a good qualification for the world of politics but not for the world of good honest representation), and because racism against blacks in our country still continues to exist in significant numbers, whereas racism against Jews is much more minimal….
"The return to Zion is a valid and important motivation."–Richard Based on what?
Bill Maher has a great riff on this in his movie, "Religilous." You take a really offensive, racist, ethnocentric, sexist statement and then put "God" in front of it, we suddenly taken it seriously. As some wise person once noted, if only the Afrikaners had been able to sell "apartheid" as a religion, they might still be ruling South Africa.
It's intsitutionall biased in favor of people who give it money. If African American gave the party money –and not just votes–their voices would be heard a lot more.
So too was "Manifest Destiny." Oh, right. We are embarrassed by that doctrine now…..so too will we be embarrassed 50 years from now by "Zionism."
Worst of all, the so-called "Palestineans" would be demanding Jordan and Syria back! Now that would REALLY ruin your day here at MondoLies…
1) Jews were always a majority. Nice revisionism on your part, though. 2) You are correct, the Arabs who were living there were "not looking to establish any ethnic-nationalist state". They identified as "Arabs", while the derogatory term "Palestinean" meant a Jew from the Holy Land. My father was a Palestinean – and he was VERY Jewish. The invention of a Palestinean Arab nation was made in 1964 by a young Egyptian revolutionary named Yasser Arafat. Look up the facts in history references – even those that are NOT kind to Israel…
I'm sorry, exactly where were the Jews always a majority? Jake, didn't you read the prior comments in this thread? Also, compare the number of Jews to Arabs in the Mandate prior to the UN partition, and at the time of the partition. Over two million Arabs were booted out of the Jewish partition side during the year and a half or so before the Mandate ended. The partition itself favored Jews; they got more land with less population, but that wasn't good enough.
Well, watch news later today; Hillary should be on there with Lieberman after their chat–see how she phrases things…
The Left has always had a Judeophile streak going all the back to Communist Jewish intellectuals, Jewish Bolsheviks and the prominent role Jews played in the early Soviet Union. On the other hand, the Left has always been financed by wealthy Jews. For example, Jacob Schiff, who ran Kuhn, Loeb (now Chase Bank) paid millions to help finance the Bolshevik Revolution of 1917. (One of his descendants is married to Al Gore’s daughter.) Wealthy Jews enabled Communism for decades, just as they have enabled Zionism via the Democratic Party for decades. Where does being bought off by wealthy Jews end and entering into and endorsement of Jewish supremacism begin? At the underwriting of Zionism.
Reverend Wright has known him a lot longer and a lot better than you. He seems to harbor grave doubts about his integrity. In fact, he seems to believe he has sold out his own people on behalf of, ahem, wealthier opportunities. Again, when will Obama ask the question of his own party: why does it favor Jews and discriminate against blacks? Doesn’t he owe his own people at least that much? Or now that he's in, to hell with those left behind? That doesn't sound like freakish talent to me; that sounds like freakish opportunism.
Witty thinks the Torah is international law. What does he know? That even back in biblical days usury, indeed the charging of interest per se, was a boiling issue? No. Witty's an accountant. He gets paid to abuse the system, ignoring the spirit of the law, finessing it for his clients.
Jews have always been a majority in the Land of Israel. That shouldn't be such a surprise. As for millions of Arabs being "booted out" even before the partition, under the watchful eye of the British soldiers who controlled everything in the Mandate, you are simply on a flight of fanciful historical revisionism – which is what I wrote in my previous comment. As for more land with fewer people and still wanting even more land, you are describing the Arab world to a tee. I'm sure that wasn't your intention, though. Two dozen Arab states, seats in the UN, armed to the teeth, more sand than you can imagine, holy ciities here, there and everywhere, but the 1/4 of 1% of the Middle East that they have not YET conquered, THAT is what they still need before they can lay down their arms and consider peace. It is YOU who don't read and seem immune to the facts. This is part of what makes you a bigot.
Maybe you haven't been paying attention, but the people who want to impose THEIR religious laws on non-believers are MUSLIM – not Hindu, not Buddhist, generally not Christian and certainly not Jewish. People who don't pay attention just LOVE MondoLies. I wonder why?