This is an interesting post, as it came from this Israeli news site that until a few months ago appeared to be extremely hawkish. It seems to recognize that a similar program has been launched by Gush Shalom and suggests that the Arab League cooperate with "leftist Israeli lawyers." Guysen, Francophone agency in Israel, reports:
The Arab League is finally figuring out that there may be legal steps to take to prevent fund raising in the United States for the West Bank settlements. The League has called on President Obama to prevent groups such as the ”American Friends of Ateret Cohanim” from transfering millions of dollars in tax-free funds to radical settler groups for the purchase of Arab property in East Jerusalem. The strategy of fighting legal battles and tax fraud with lawyers, and why not with leftist Isrraeli lawyers is something that the Palestinians and the Arab League must explore. It could be much more effective than throwing stones.
The "American Friends of Ateret Cohanim" is headed by millionaire Irving Moskovitz. He made his money with bingo parlors and by stripping down health centers and selling them, in short, dirty money. Most Israelis do not like this group, and see them as radical instigators against peace, but when violence erupts, the lines are drawn.
“The Arab League is finally figuring out that there may be legal steps to take to prevent fund raising in the United States for the West Bank settlements”.
It’s not for lack of intelligence on behalf of the Arab League that’s been the problem, but it’s cohesion, or lack of it, that’s rendered them so incompetent.
It behooves the Arab American community to do more to influence policy changes in the White House.
Begs the question therefore: Why are Arabs not united? And what/who are the forces that will not permit such a union?
The sad fact is that while such pro-occupation organizations operate freely in the United States, individuals and/or charity organizations who send humanitarian aid to Gaza – school text books, notebooks, crayons and blankets – get sentenced to 65 years.
A case in Florida a few years ago involved a university professor who was accused of funding Hamas. He was acquitted of all charges. But, US immigration services deported him.
This is happening right here in the States. These ruthless and fascist prosecutors (the likes of Alan Dershowitz) seek such barbaric sentences for people who are doing nothing that remotely resembles the violations of international law that Ateret Cohanim, for example, does.
The usual double standard applies. Jewish “humanitarian and educational” charitable tax-favored donations
fund the illegal settlers, while charitable funding to directly aid Palestinian children
is cut off as presumed to be funding HAMAS terrorists.
Nolan and Citizen have nailed it. There is nothing in the nature of Arab peoples or nations that prevents cooperation — it’s been American corruption that has prevented them from dealing within our imperialist-minded bureaucracy. Frankly, the long and short of it is, if you’re not white, it’s hard to get justice in the US. Just ask the thousands of African Americans who were put on caging lists by the Republican Party.
Great Comment Nolan! It might be interesting to see how private American aid or contributions to the Irish factions was handled, back in the day.
Assuming this man is found guilty, what do you suppose his sentence is going to be? Will there even be a trial? Who knows.
link to bloomberg.com
I’m not sure why Arabs would be united. They certainly don’t have the hive mentality many Jews exhibit.
Now, now. Let’s not go too far in the other extreme.
Well, in context, substantially, the millions of Arabs are ruled by a small band of royal tribes (extended families) with all the power within each Arab state afforded by oil reserves; government jobs are key.
Ho-kay! America Fust-Cless has learned to insert a moderating “many” before the “hive mentality many Jews exhibit”. Cause if there is anything a guy who wants to free America from “alien influences” rejects, it’s the “hive mentality”.
“The Arab League is finally figuring out that there may be legal steps to take to prevent fund raising in the United States for the West Bank settlements”.
It’s not for lack of intelligence on behalf of the Arab League that’s been the problem, but it’s member cohesion, or lack of it, that’s rendered it so incompetent.
It behooves the Arab American community to do more to influence policy changes in the White House.
Begs the question therefore: Why are Arabs not united? And what/who are the forces that will not permit such a union?
Selective enforcement of existing US law in relevant statutes is very much part of the problem. The officials in charge of enforcement are politically appointed; not many Arab Americans in those slots, whether, e.g., in the IRS or Homeland Security, or
the FBI, etc. Everyone in government knows the ADL, few the Arab version of same.
And at the top rung of American political leadership, AIPAC runs with Goldman Sachs in influence, to say the very least.
The fact that Jewish pressure was able to quash the AIPAC spy case is not encouraging.
It’s even worse than that, actually:
link to youtube.com
See, being Muslim today is pretty much what it was like being Jewish up into the early part of the last century.
That’s why I answered Taxi’s post as to Arab-Americans (as opposed to Arab countries). I think it’s unrealistic to expect Arab Americans to push Palestine as a single purpose issue, when they themselves are under attack. They’re also a very diverse group among themselves (including religiously). Also, not that it’s always about fairness, but it’s not fair to dump this mess in the laps of Arabs. What is really needed is what Mearsheimer-Walt (sadly) oppose: a broad-based realist anti-Zionist movement, to restore American sovereignty.
Taxi, this is all great stuff, but you really should get clear on the difference between “begs the question” and “begs for the question”. They don’t mean the same thing at all. I’m only offering a little advice, you start begging questions like that, and next thing you know, you’re “wrecking havoc” making “speaches” and becoming (as I have been told I am, many times) a “looser”.
Why do “the Arabs” (a if such a body existed, I thought there were Arabs and all kinds other people there) have to be united? Only because, thanks to shabbes Goy America, Israel punches way above it’s weight. If Israel had to depend on its own resources, Arab unity would not be that crucial.
I think you’re highlighting an important false dichotomy. Because Israel at least tries to pretend that it is somehow the sole champion and representative of the Jewish people, so therefore there must be something comparable among the Arabs that can be attacked — it’s the “if Israel is doing it, you can be sure they’ll accuse someone else of doing it” principle I described earlier.
Actually, we’ve seen the catastrophic failure of this methodology at play — “the Arab menace” has a shifting face in the propaganda machine… sometimes it’s Osama bin Laden. Used to be Saddam Hussein. The Ayatollah of Iran is a perennial favorite, and now the President of Iran stands in well enough as well. And of course there’s the reliable caricature of the Saudi royal family and the “oil sheiks.” Because there is no actual Islamic menace, there is nothing stable on which to nail the propaganda.
It’s the same game with a new target. Last century, it was the Jewish moneylender instead of the Muslim oil shiek that was the target. I think rather sadly, Israel has literally become the hideous fake caricature that Nazis made up to paint a target on the backs of the Jewish people, by becoming the political and financial force that pulls the strings behind the scenes, much to the woe of the rest of us, Jewish or not. And worse, Israel has adopted the same tactics of propaganda, race hatred and even lebensraum as well.
Myself? I’m just glad to know that Israel is not, in fact, the end-all and be-all of Judaism. Not by a long shot. Mooser proves it, as does most of the Jewish people who participate on this site and those that I’ve met in real life.
“the Arabs”, somehow reminds me of the constant shift between Palestinians, when necessary and Arabs when more helpful. Like in: It’s the Arabs fault to not integrate the refugees. Thus I somehow agree with Mooser against Taxi. If you demand a unified vision of the Arabs you move very close to the Israeli perceptions. The sea of Arabs around Israel. But are they really? Do not all these states have their separate and quite different problems and interests?
Chaos 4700, I think we have to accept that there is a danger scenario. Propaganda wouldn’t work with a grain of truth. Look at Egypt or Algeria, which had quite a bit of troubles. Look at the history of attacks against Americans. Osama wants the Americans to leave, Israel to him was an afterthought.
Also I am not especially fond of this: I think rather sadly, Israel has literally become the hideous fake caricature that Nazis made up to paint a target on the backs of the Jewish people, by becoming the political and financial force that pulls the strings behind the scenes, much to the woe of the rest of us, Jewish or not.
I think the biggest irony in all this is that the dominant view of Israel in the West versus the Arab world (the sea of Arabs) has become apparent by 911 to a much broader community. And hadn’t the pro-Israel lobby so enthusiastically tried to hijack the issues and hoist Bush onto a pedestal–or should I say make him ascend the throne?– as the ultimate warrior against the “Arab mind/danger” this wouldn’t have become so apparent to many of us. (Nuke them into surrender)
Israeli/pro-Israel hawks: Missing crisis management. Hubris?
We have a phrase in German high school. The worst grade is six, the best one. The sentence is simple:
Six, sit down. “Sechs, setzen”.
Just came across this piece of information about ethnic/racial profiling:
Israeli Shin Bet (aka Shabak) is operating at South African airports under the guise of el al security. Their weapons are registered to the Israeli embassy in Johannesburg (even though el al claims to be a private company) and here’s the kicker, South African citizens with a – shall we say – certain appearance get harassed by Israel’s security service even when they are not flying with el al, but merely picking up a friend at the airport. They pass themselves off as “airport security” and engage also in collecting information about peace activists – even South African ones – and harassing those who are known to have connections with Palestinian peace activists.
This is from the South African TV program Carte Blanche
The segment is entitled “Take Off”
link to beta.mnet.co.za
From personal experience I know that when flying out of certain airports around the world, regardless of the airline you’re traveling with, if your destination is Israel, then you’ll be questioned and searched by Israeli Shin Bet. So far, I have seen this done at Schiphol in Amsterdam, Frankfurt, JFK, Nice Cote Dazur (France), Toronto and Boston Logan. In fact, at Frankfurt, ALL flights to Israel – regardless of airline – depart from a separate terminal that conducts extra security screening for passengers and the entire terminal is run by Israeli agents (they speak Hebrew among themselves).
Hey, we’ve seen that Israeli brand of “security” imported to the US post 9/11. Just ask anybody who’s brown-skinned or has an accent who’s tried to fly in the past eight years.
One of the goals of this site is to promote critical discussion and debate on US foreign policy and the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. We want Mondoweiss to be a place that everyone feels comfortable visiting, to read and comment, regardless of political perspective. People might not always like what we post, but everyone should feel invited and encouraged to join the discussion, share their opinions, and engage in debate.
But isn’t it hypocritical to have Jeffrey Blankfort be one of your posters, when he certainly does not encourage discussion or debate.
Do you care to elaborate, or is that just a throwaway ad hom?
It’s a throwaway ad hominem. That’s Wondering Jew’s specialty. Holy cow does he have a weak argument this time, though. Usually he doesn’t have to resort to those until at least the first reply.
Sneers from the like of Chaos are acceptable, until such time as Mondoweiss includes him among the posters. Sneers are de rigeur for some of the commenters on this blog. Mister Blankfort’s usage of “Wehrmacht” rhetoric is one count against him. The other is his referring to me in the third person on a different thread (Shlomo Sands’ The Jews are not a people”) and making assumptions about me based upon my not immediately responding to his third person question. This is not unusual for the sneers of the commenters of this “discussion” and “debate”. Still it is not acceptable for someone who posts on a site that claims to encourage all points of view and debate and discussion.
Ad hominem, ad hominem, ad hominem… that really is all you know, WJ, isn’t it? I’m guessing everything you post that’s not ad hominem is merely cut and paste, isn’t it?
Get over yourself, buddy. This the world doesn’t actually revolve around you.
One of the effects of ziocaine is a feeling of omnipotence and omniscience, alternating with periods of helpless paranoia. I think we got “wondering” on the upswing, here.
Amazing how he mixes his demands with expressions of piteous helplessness, alternating with condemnations. Do you suppose he acts like that at work? In his married life? With his neighbors? Nope, ziocaine takes you to a special place, a sort of bizarre gated condo community of the mind!
Wondering Jew, it would help if you would be slightly more precise.
How do you want to avoid confrontational clashes? What makes it desirable or necessary?
What exactly happened:
You could simply go back and cut and paste the relevant parts of the exchange.
Now could you also please define: “Wehrmacht” rhetoric .
On the surface your comment is thoughtful and slightly melancholic. But I am not sure what to make of the fact that you smuggle the above into it. What are you suggesting? Blankfort is a Nazi? Is Wehrmacht the same or only it’s warrior face?
WJ, feel free to discuss the directly implied issue in Blankfort’s posting, i.e., the status quo’s
selective prosecution of charities and charitable donors professing to fund humanitarian aid to Palestine, while ignoring similarly set up charities and charitable actions indirectly funding settlements, since those settlements defy official US
foreign policy. The funds eventually flowing to purely the terrorist side of HAMAS
is so easy to prove, while the funds flowing to the Israeli settlement projects is
so hard to prove? Please.
Leander,
I’m not sure if I read it on this site or somewhere else in Blankfort’s writings but he used the term Wehrmacht to refer to Israel. His rhetoric is not wehrmacht-like but he uses wehrmacht to refer to Israel.
Here are Blankfort’s comments
I would guess that “wondering jew” has never been to Israel because the one thing that becomes immediately obvious when visiting there is that the people who call themselves Jews are as ethnically diverse in appearance as one will find among the population in most American cities.
And when I didn’t respond to this third person allusion to myself, his next comment:
Well, apparently I was correct. “wondering jew” is not “wandering jew” to the extent that his affinity for Israel has not reached the extent that he decided to travel there and see for himself what exactly is the reality that he defends. This I find not unusual.
In the past when I have had arguments with American Jewish defenders of Israel and have asked them when was the last time they had been there, they shamefully admit that their love affair is of the long distance variety. Strangely (or not so strangely), they have preferred France, Greece and the UK. It is easy to defend a poster image than the reality behind it.
End quote.
My personal opinion is that the stuff that passes for discussion and debate in the comments section is about 25% valuable and 25% scuzzy and 50% borderline. So it goes, as Kurt Vonnegut liked to repeat in Slaughterhouse 5. But since Blankfort is not just a commenter but an actual member of the board, so to speak, he should veer away from the scuzzy and even from the borderline and try to be firmly in the 25% valuable.
WJ – I would not regard the third-person reference as necessarily insulting, as the dysfunctional software of this site does not permit threaded replies so that people know whose comment a post is responding to.
potsherd- it is very easy to directly address you. all it requires is your name. voila. not difficult at all.
the early days (or nights) of saturday night live are brought to mind as in the great dan ackroyd and jane curtin arguments. Jane, you ignorant slut. was how dan would so often begin his comments.
it is true that one can be rude even when one addresses another directly, but third person is a rudeness of its own.
I would certainly advise people to do so, if only to prevent the kind of confusion I have seen here so often.
I do not like the use of Nazi symbolism for political gains, but I have a certain degree of sympathy for a political perspective that questions the idealization and idolization of Israel, and thus can understand the temptation to counter the “holy” with the “diabolic”.
Do you accept the extensive use of Nazi imagery by Israel, the neocons, and pro-Israel hawks? I think it will be very hard to get it out of our political discourse.
I realized I have to go back and look at it in context, but I do not have enough time now. I have to see, what he responded to, how you triggered it.
it is true that one can be rude even when one addresses another directly, but third person is a rudeness of its own.
OK, that’s true.
The concept is to share in the marketplace of ideas Wondering, not promulgate fairy tales and lies in support of a murderous and genocidal colonial enterprise. The first requirement of sane discussion or argumentation is to be in the realm of reality not self-serving fantasy – otherwise you do not have the building blocks to even converse.
V…
So if people agree with you, they are discussing and arguing sanely and if they disagree with you they are promulgating fairy tales and lies. I’ll go get a pencil and write that down.
As if you need to write that down. Anyone disagrees with you and the personal attacks spill out like foam from a pit bulls mouth.
“The first requirement of sane discussion or argumentation is to be in the realm of reality not self-serving fantasy – otherwise you do not have the building blocks to even converse”
That may be true, but they make a heck of a building material for illegal settlements!
Wondering Jew, I know our tendency is always toward the “hive-mind” and despotic Bolshevism (what can I say, it’s just a knack we have) but this is America, and a very simple principle reigns:
When you pay the fees for a web-site, you get to decide what gets published on it! Shocking, I know, and not like a kibbutz where we share all the women and send the kids away to be raised in a kennel, but not everyplace is heaven, huh?
And Blogger is free! So what’s stopping you? Please, go ahead and set up a web-site, and exclude Blankfort. That’ll show him!
Or are you, in a roundabout sort of kvetch (my whine, it’s such a fine whine) admitting the appeal and popularity of the ideas expressed on Mondowiess?
Jeffrey Blankfort is one of the few uncompromised voices on I/P. In particular, his recounting of his personal experiences within the “left” peace movement and media establishment are critical to an understanding of how media and foreign policy have been corrupted by people with loyalties to Israel, even those who otherwise seem to be all about peace and love.
“We want Mondoweiss “
Remember what Tonto said when he and the Lone Ranger were surrounded by hostile Native Americans? “Looks like we’re in trouble, Tonto!”, said the Masked Man
“What you mean-um ‘we’, Paleface?” replied his faithful Indian retainer.
WJ – don’t you think you’re kinda overusing that “sneer” line? Go look at the posts from most of the Zionists here if you want to see the curled lips and hateful putdowns that make discussion here unpleasant.
If you have something against Blankfort, you might explicate more fully to make your case.
But isn’t it hypocritical to have Jeffrey Blankfort be one of your posters, when he certainly does not encourage discussion or debate.
Hunh? He doesn’t encourage discussion or debate? What are you talking about? Blankfort has been around here longer than any of us, and has contributed to this site as a commenter and poster longer than most. ‘Discuss and debate’ could be his middle names. Haven’t you ever read any of his stuff elsewhere on the web?
MRW, don’t you know? WJ is simply responding in the only way he knows — personal attacks. They don’t even have to be founded in anything remotely real, as you’ve shown above. It’s like that one species of lizard that shoots blood from its eyes to startle predators. Just hoping that fake wounds and pure shock value is enough to protect his failed arguments.
When No.1 and No.2 don’t sell, just keep piling on the Nos. 3 & 4!
link to jewssansfrontieres.blogspot.com
Please, stop me if I have offered that link before! I wouldn’t want to repeat myself.
“WJ is simply responding in the only way he knows — personal attacks.”
Sure, of course, it just shows how he’s suffered from anti-Semitism all his life. Everybody knows the constant anti-Semitic attacks, and complete impossibility of justice for them makes Jews ready to jump to the attack, and sure their accusations will be taken seriously and have effect.
I’d just like to know how you know this: “Most Israelis do not like this group [Ateret Cohanim]“. I know on opinions I’d have a tough time here so I just thought to ask about your facts.