We’ve all wondered when NPR would investigate the bigotry underlying the Occupation and ever-growing colonization of Palestine. Yesterday, Morning Edition finally announced a piece on how groups of Israeli men roam streets, intimidating Palestinian and Jewish people who date each other. I looked forward to an expose’ of the thugs’ intolerance. Sadly, NPR spit out the opposite: a paean to the racism of those Israelis. Renee Montagne opens with the "news" that, "There is a new enemy for some Israelis: romance between Jewish women and Arab men, and vigilantes have banded together to fight it. The vigilante groups are walking the streets and towns across Israel. The largest and most notorious is in the Jewish settlements that have sprung up in and around traditionally Arab East Jerusalem."
What does Montagne mean, "Jewish settlements" "have sprung up" amid "traditionally Arab" East Jerusalem? Montagne misleads listeners from the outset, declining to mention either the illegal Israeli Occupation of Palestinian lands or its continual theft and violence toward the people of Palestine. Just yesterday, the Israeli government demolished yet more Palestinian-owned buildings in East Jerusalem, without a peep from NPR.
Montagne reveals that "Sheera Frenkel joined one of the groups on patrol." Montagne makes Frenkel’s participation sound like camaraderie–the same phrase one would use if Frenkel actually became a vigilante herself. Montagne’s only critical word is her label "vigilante" for people who are in fact vigilantes.
Sheera Frenkel tells us that these vigilantes object to "Arab men dating Jewish girls." Frenkel’s terms treat her subject unequally in two ways: she opposes an ethnicity, "Arab," to a religion, "Jewish"– a racist formulation, for, unbelievably, Frenkel never once mentions the boys’ true identity: "Palestinian." Meanwhile, Frenkel’s whole approach is sexist, heightening the supposed "danger" posed by "Arab men" to "Jewish girls." If Frenkel were fair, she would describe the couples as "men and women," or, because they are "underaged," as "boys and girls."
Frenkel says that "’David’–who doesn’t want his name used" has a "mission" to "patrol," searching to "find Arab-Jewish couples and break up their dates." Frenkel shows no revulsion toward David’s interference. David avows: "My heart hurts every time I see a Jewish girl with an Arab. It’s extremely upsetting. I ask myself, ‘How did we get to this situation? How did we descend to this level?’ It is a serious step backwards in our eyes." Frenkel neglects to condemn or even question David about his hunger for segregation. She lets pass David’s bigoted claim that he and his ilk exist on a plane inherently "above" Palestinians and would be degraded by "falling" in love with them–literally plunging both down and behind.
Frenkel grants the vigilantes legitimacy: "In groups named ‘Fire for Judaism’ and ‘Love of Youth,’ 30 to 40 men…patrol the streets each night," without questioning their monikers or motives. "Officially, they’re on the lookout for any mixed couples," but a driver called "TS" "says the problem lies solely with Arab men dating Jewish girls." In other words, another layer of prejudice applies: the gangs aren’t just looking for any "mixed couples." Frenkel refrains from asking the vigilantes why Palestinian men in love with Jewish women is a bigger threat to their prejudices than Palestinian women with Jewish men.
TS says that the "Arab" men entice the girls with gifts: "These men approach the girl in a nice way. They buy her things. They build trust with the woman so that, given some time, the girls just blindly follow them. And–with time–one friend follows another, and soon enough, you have a commune made up of these types of girls." Horrors: a "commune," no less. How is such a conglomeration different from a kibbutz? Frenkel does not interrogate the self-appointed posse about its assumption that the Jewish women are saps–bribed into myopia. Instead, Frenkel tells us–without a glimmer of disapproval–that such Jewish persecution of Palestinian men dating Jewish women has actually become the official policy of one local government: "In…an industrial city in Israel’s center," the "municipality has formed a special division" for dealing with the "what it sees as the problem of underage Arab-Jewish couples."
Frenkel comments, "the couplings are an unforeseen bi-product of the growing number of Jewish settlements that have been built across largely Arab East Jerusalem." "Couplings"?–sounds as if Frenkel’s chatting about the mating habits of animals, rather than serious human beings capable of great devotion. "[U]nforeseen bi-product"?–naive inadvertence to the consequences of stealing others’ property and moving in next door, not a calculated exponential expansion. "[G]rowing number"?–an innocent increase devoid of larceny. "Jewish settlements"?–Jewish pioneers taming uninhabited land, instead of colonies pinched by invaders. "[T]hat have been built"?–simple construction on mysteriously bulldozed ruins, rather than obliterating others’ homes . "[A]cross largely Arab East Jerusalem"?–accidental spread throughout territory once inhabited by Arabs, never purloining the legal inheritance of Palestinians or dominating those who so tenuously remain. Frenkel conceals the Israeli breaches of International Law in its ethnic cleansing, revealing instead a sense of Palestinians as sub-human. Frenkel, like Montagne, condemns listeners to ignorance of the bloody Occupation and its ends by hiding every relevant fact.
Frenkel informs us that "Alona Levy, a 16-year-old Jewish teenager, says that she gets approached by Arab men every day," twisting the tale into the threat posed by lascivious aliens to virtuous damsels. Alona portrays her problem as predatory Arabs: "a group of Arab boys drove by and were yelling at us, ‘Hey, hot girls!,’ and we didn’t pay them any attention. We aren’t interested in them. This happens to us almost three times a day at least." Frenkel doesn’t question but rather validates Alona Levy’s bias about Palestinian boys, announcing, "But she [Alona] and her friends understand why some girls decide to defy local norms and date Arab men." Alona claims that "There are a lot of girls that go out with Arab men, because Arab boys are wild, they’re bad boys." Alona drives home her point, "I think they [the Palestinian boys] like us, because Arab girls are all conservative and wear the covering on their hair, and we dress normally." Frenkel doesn’t investigate Alona’s caricatures by actually interviewing either Palestinian boys or girls.
Frenkel reverts to David, for whom "mixed couples" are "a growing epidemic." Frenkel refrains from condemning David’s allergy to romance among Palestinians and Jews. Frenkel doesn’t query David’s fear, let alone her own mischaracterization of such couples as "mixed." What has happened to our American press if an NPR "reporter" frankly implies that Palestinian-Israeli couples are mesalliances or miscegenation? What sort of paranoia sees intimacy among Palestinians and Israelis as a plague the way David does? What kind of "journalist" concurs with his categories of abuse? Frenkel instead announces that David and his fellow vigilantes target girls who are "known problem cases." Frenkel recounts David’s story of accosting one Jewish girl who refused to get out of a car with Palestinians, taking his word that the car sped off–after first hitting David’s leg–after which David chased the car for 30 minutes, quitting only after filing a police report.
David announces that: "Our goal is to talk to the girls and convince them that their place is with the Jewish nation, not with our enemies." Nowhere does Frenkel utter even a yip about so barbarous a belief: that Jews belong only "with the Jewish nation" and that Palestinians are inviolable "enemies." David brags that he and his group have "saved" four girls, declaiming that, "Even if we have rescued only one girl," "we have done a good deed, and we thank God for it." Frenkel remains mum about such fundamentalist zealotry. Frenkel instead affirms in her closing lines that "’David,"–while hiding behind a pseudonym himself–wants publicly to humiliate his target: "He hopes that drawing attention to the incident will embarrass the girl and force her to leave her boyfriend. He says it’s one more girl he might save."
What a terrible end to a biased report. Frenkel shuts down her twisted "story" of maniacal busy-bodies–mobs, even–with the fiction that David actually cares to "save" a girl. He merely wants to harass a person better than he is–or at least more open-minded. "David" craves nothing but hate, pursuing an eternal war based only on his own lethal animosity.
Sheera Frenkel never criticizes the racism of the vigilantes or compares it to traditional U.S. values of equality and kinship for all. We can’t excuse Frenkel’s omissions by the traditional alibi of "objectivity," for there’s nothing "fair" about her approach. Frenkel interviews no Palestinians who love Jewish people or Jews who love Palestinian people. Worse, Frenkel valorizes the vigilantes’ mania. Sheera Frenkel refuses to depict the affection among these young couples as the gift that it really is. The couples’ connection across a lethal Occupation is a hopeful, good sign that peace–amity–harmony are not only possible, but are truly happening right now.
Related posts:
- Dear Abby, My neighbor’s daughter lacks religion, and an exploitative Arab has seduced her. How do we stop them?
- I let my sexism show
- ‘Columbia Journalism Review’ joins list of publications outperforming ‘The New Yorker’ on Gaza
- This morning we ‘waive our consular rights’
- ‘NPR’ doesn’t quote Palestinians because their view is ‘predictable’
{ 1 trackback }
{ 70 comments }
Substitute “black” for Arab and “white” for Jewish.
“Substitute “black” for Arab and “white” for Jewish.”
Well, that’s just crazy. If that were the case then you would never have a Barack Hussein Obama.
There’s nothing left to say. The article speaks for itself.
I’m not surprised that Palestinians have such negative reputation while Israelis enjoy higher approval rates in polls conducted in the US.
Decades of NPR’s and the MSM’s kind of “journalism” have instilled well the image of the savage Palestinian, the pedophile and pervert, hunting down those innocent teenage Jewish girls, luring them with candy and gifts no less.
Then there are the caricatures of “Lawrence of Arabia” and “The Magic Carpets of Aladdin” of the Middle East.
why is it when the world is closing ranks finally on israel’s horrid and inhuman behavior that the extremist elements there actually gain power and behave even more horribly?
“Frenkel’s terms treat her subject unequally in two ways: she opposes an ethnicity, “Arab,” to a religion, “Jewish”– a racist formulation, for, unbelievably, Frenkel never once mentions the boys’ true identity: “Palestinian.”"
Ms. Kneedler has decided that for NPR or the Jewish interviewees to call the boys “Arab” rather than “Palestinian” is racist. That “Palestinian” is their true identity and “Arab” a racist formulation. She has also decided the “Jewish” is a religion rather than an ethnicity.
(The Jewish religion versus ethnicity is one which has begun to be dealt with at length particularly recently in reaction to Shlomo Sands’ book.)
If you asked the average Palestinian “Are you an Arab?” would they answer, “No, my true identity is Palestinian.”? I doubt it. I believe they would say “Yes, I am an Arab.” If you then asked them, “But aren’t you a Palestinian?” They would answer, “I am both an Arab and a Palestinian.” Would they say they feel insulted being called an Arab? I doubt it.
(I have not asked Arabs or Palestinians these questions, so I may be wrong. But has Ms. Kneedler asked Arabs or Palestinians these questions?)
>Would they say they feel insulted being called an Arab? I doubt it.
That’s not quite the issue.
The issue is that Israel has perpetuated the narrative that there was never a Palestinian collective, let alone a nation. That’s why, Palestinians in Israel are often referred to as “Arabs”.
The other aspect is that the Israeli government, through divide-and-rule tactics, has sought to quell any unity that might grow among Israel’s 20% Palestinians.
For example, the state created sub groups of so-called ethnic minorities, such as the Druze, Bedouin, and Arabs.
Palestinian Muslims and Christians have the “Arab” designation in their Israeli ID cards, but the Druze, who are Arab and Palestinian as well, have “Druze” listed.
iirc, when asked this question, most of them say “Muslim”.
It depends on several factors.
Palestinians who live in the cities, tend to be economically well off and have higher education. As a result, they are more likely to be secular.
Also, the communist party was a major player during the 70s and 80s. Palestinians used to get scholarships to study in the former Soviet Union, so an entire generation of Palestinians earned their graduate degrees there. Many even came back married to Christian women from Russia, the Ukraine, Romania etc..
So they are far more likely to define themselves along national lines rather than religious ones.
This is a pseudo-issue, a distraction from the real problem.
If you saw such an article as this about racist vigilantes in Mississippi, roaming the streets to keep white girls from dating black boys, would anyone go off on a tangent to obsess about whether they should be called “black” or “African-American”? The issue is the racist vigilantes.
Within the context of this article, you are right. It is a distraction.
But, in and of itself, it’s a very important issue.
That feels like diverting attention, Wondering Jew. What you do ignore is that Arab connects much more easily to one of the main talking points: Tiny Israel surrounded by a sea of Arabs, in other words the enemy. And the whole series of arguments that follow from that, e.g. it’s the Arabs fault since they didn’t take in their brothers and sisters, to whom they ultimately belong.
Now if Arab isn’t a derogatory term or the term of the ultimate adversary why are Arab Jews called “Oriental Jews” in Israel?
The whole story shows the macho mindset of the Israeli society. Girls, women as a property that has to be guarded against from the pure sexual animal instincts of Arab men. Better don’t ask me what that reminds me of.
I thought the difference between Palestinian and Israel girls was that one is free the other bound?
It’s pretty interesting that the the Muslim version of their women is very similar to the Israeli version of their women–for the Jews so far, and I’d day increasingly likely for Arab Americans is the conflict between assimilation and “the Silent holocast.”
White gentile Americans of course are simply to bow to the power of individualism; not that I think that’s wrong, only that I think others are not so steered by the powers that be.
I know many people from Arab lands and if I referred to them as Arab they would likely view me as naive and insensitive. It would brand me as someone who is not interested in their culture or background. When I ask them about their origins they invariably mention their nation. Those from Palestine quite proudly acknowledge that. In the US and Israel the only people who lump them all together as ‘Arab’ invariably have pro Israeli and anti-Arab biases. It is like using the word Pals to describe Palestinians, not explicitly racist but they only people I see using it are Israeli supporters who really do not like any of them.
using lumping language works for the project of keeping ignorant Americans fearful and inflamed about the “Arab” threat. In the hasbara/propaganda project, “Iranian” is frequently conflated with “Arab” and “Islamic,” which many Iranians would consider an amazing feat of propaganda, since many Iranians are quite elitist and consider ‘Arabs’ to be beneath them, and consider Islam to have co-opted the finer Persian culture.
AH, I think I’ve heard this before; and I can hear it anytime on David Duke’s web site. I’d like to hear Witty’s POV on this resurrected KKK under the Star Of David. Of course, nobody is allowed to equate these historical analogies, nor equate Israel’s official POV
with the NAZI POV. Granted, the Versailles Treaty impact on Germans is not the same as the impact
of Jews of the Nazi regime; but, given the need to work around the Nuremberg Trials and
Geneva laws pursuant thereto, what is the USA doing supporting Israel with a blank check? We instigated and fully supported the UN, and now we do all we can to disparage it, and take full advantage of our slot on the Security Council to negate the UN’s universal hope for humanity. Is this what are boys who died during WW2 died for? Is this what ML King died for? I say not.
He who controls the narrative controls the truth.
NPR joins the Judeofacist KKK brigade.
Ethno-nutters do as ethno-nutters are.
My letter to NPR:
Dear Ms. Shepherd:
I am the person who called this morning about the Morning Edition story on the Jewish vigilantes by Sheera Frankel. I would like to clarify briefly what I (and others) found so appalling about the story. There are actually so many things that are appalling about how the story was reported that it is hard to know where to start, but I will begin with these four:
1) Most broadly, the story leaves out any sense that Israel is occupying Palestinian territory, and that it has done so for more that 40 years, against international law. So when Montaigne introduces the story by speaking of “the Jewish settlements that have sprung up in and around traditionally Arab East Jerusalem,” she is either ignorantly or deliberately ignoring the fact that Israel has intentionally built such illegal settlements by stealing Palestinian land in many cases from private owners. Once again, one must stress that this land-theft is in defiance of international law. Frankel’s story leaves out who built the settlements– they didn’t just spring up. So the problem here is a lack of context.
2) The second problem is that Frankel gives the clear impression that she sympathizes with the cause of these vigilantes, especially when she interviews David and the 16 year old girl, allowing them to say a bunch of prejudiced things about “Arabs,” without contesting those statements, or allowing the “Arabs” to respond. Think about Selma, Alabama in 1965, and imagine a 1965 CBS reporter interviewing bands of white racists trying to protect white women from the supposed predations of “black men” who dared to date white women without challenging their racist statements. Would any respectable reporter not ask for at least a response from such a “black man” or at least a leader from the African American community?
3) David and the other racists who seem appalled by Jews dating “Arabs” continually refer to “Arab men” and “Jewish girls,” as if the Arabs are pedophiles who are preying on underage girls, when in reality the “Arabs” are probably “boys” the same age as the girls (Otherwise David could obviously have the pedophile arrested.) Frankel reproduces this predatory language several times in her piece, i.e., “he spotted a Jewish girl entering a car with several Arab men”; “she and her friends understand why some girls decide to defy local norms and date Arab men.” This is simply unacceptable for any reporter to do. The other obvious question here is what about Jewish men and “Arab women”– do they ever date? Or are we really back in pre-1965 Selma Alabama with the white racists obsessing about black men raping white women (only this time your young intrepid reporter presents the white racists sympathetically)? I have the distinct feeling that most of the dating between “Arab men” and “Jewish girls” goes on in the fervid imaginations of David, the other vigilantes, the 16 year old girl and possibly your reporter as well.
4) Then finally, there is the problem of “Arab” versus “Jew”, which is not really a distinction. I suspect what appalls David about Jewish girls dating “Arabs” is not that they are “Arabs” — after all, there are Arab Jews from all over the Middle East. It is that they are Muslim or Christian and Palestinian by origin (they could be Palestinian but also Israel citizens). Get your reporters to report things accurately, and stop treating your listener as if he/she does not understand anything about the problems in Israel/ the Palestinian territories.
Finally, let’s consider American values here– what does the American experience teach us about racists who go around trying to patrol the purity of ethnic boundaries? Shouldn’t American public radio reflect American values (not rightwing Israeli values)? ANd that said, shouldn’t these young people who choose to break down ethnic and religious barriers, who try to defy their parents’ prejudices, be applauded for attempting to live in harmony with one another? If Frankel could not interview one of these girls or boys who are dating, she could have at least presented them as a positive force for change. After all, these young people are not dropping white phosphorous on defenseless children. At the very most, they are having some harmless fun in the back seat of Dad’s car.
Get your reporters to report things accurately, and stop treating your listener as if he/she does not understand anything about the problems in Israel/ the Palestinian territories.
There aren’t meant to understand, they are a mass that has to be manipulated into seeing things they way they are “told” they are.
Madrid, where is Mr. Shepards email? I also want to send in an email condemning this type of reporting. I can understand holding on a judgement – present both sides and perspectives and let it be (although NPR typically takes a position even if it allows both sides to speak their view)…however I don’t see the other side being given a chance to explain
I’m glad you called and got through. What was their response?
Thanks for that question potsherd.
Ms. Shepherd was to say the least extremely defensive. She tried to argue that I had misunderstood the piece, that the reporter was not sympathetic with David and the sixteenth year old Jewish girl. I had the transcript in front of me and read her from it, and then she said that maybe I had a point. She then said she might go back and listen to the piece.
My problem is that there were so many things I found horrible about the piece that I don’t think I was very effective on the phone, so if they use my comment on the phone, I am afraid the perspective I was coming from may have gotten confused. My first comment, for example, was the fact that it was presented as “arab” versus “jew”, although that was not the thing I found most objectionable.
At the end of the conversation, I asked her if she thought it right that taxpayers were paying for reports that were so obviously racist against Arabs. And she said that taxpayers don’t pay for NPR– donors and contributors do. I then said, “well I suppose then you are simply unaccountable to people like me.” She said, “I didn’t say that. You obviously took the time to respond.” I said, “Perhaps just basic journalistic standards would have improved this piece.” I said,” For example, I don’t think CNN or CBS would make the basic mistakes that Frenkel made here.”
She ended by saying she would listen again, taking my name and other information. I then told her I would write her an email addressing my concerns more clearly.
If memory serves, didn’t the Bush administration appoint a conservative “overseer” to NPR? I think Tomlinson was the guy’s name. He rode on Npr, and made it’s news section what it is today. He was busted for, get this, running a horse-race betting operation out of the NPR office or something like that.
Anyway, Tomlinson (I love to post things and look them up afterward) gave “liberal” NPR the “balanced” approach they adhere to today.
Yup, that’s him.
Thanks for the smile, Mooser: (I love to post things and look them up afterward)
I was pretty sure I was right, I Googled, and sure enough, memory serves.
It wasn’t easy, (as a life long listener and contributor to NPR) to listen to the deterioration.
LeaNder, please clarify your opinion. What does the USA regime do to support this maipulation, if anything? And the USA MSM? We wait your response.
Do ‘Fire for Judaism’ (FFJ) and ‘Love of Youth (LOY), have the same blue star of david on their (KKK) white hoods, or do different groups distinguish themselves by emblazoning their white hoods with different symbols of the zionist brand?
Note to Mondoweiss readers: the comments condemning the NPR report are running roughly 85-3 against Sheera Frenkel’s shockingly racist and bigoted report on NPR. Maybe we’re entering a new age of enlightenment, i.e., Arabs are the new African Americans.
I encourage everyone to listen to the report by clicking http://www.npr.org/templates/player/mediaPlayer.html?action=1&t=1&islist=false&id=113724468&m=113724447
If you agree that Frenkel is a David Duke racist, then send your protest to NPR_Response@npr.org.
Here’s one of the best comments on the NPR website:
I’d like to know if anyone who wrote to protest has had a reply from NPR, other than the canned autoreply.
Thanks to Sheera Frenkel’s stellar NPR piece, now the hasbara makes sense. Read this headline and tell me if our “best friend in the region” isn’t manipulating us with stereotypes.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2009/09/16/israeli-army-rescues-us-c_n_288789.html
“Former Israeli Soldiers Rescue U.S. Citizen Held Hostage By Palestinian Husband”
Gee, guys, how can we ever repay you? By doubling the $3 billion in tax dollars we give you? By turning a blind eye while you refuse to freeze settlements? How about burying the Goldstone Report? Yeah, that’s the ticket.
About the Goldstone report, I’ve heard it claimed that Goldstone has Israel’s best interests at heart since he is a Zionist and a Jew. Does Goldstone claim to be a Zionist? Couldn’t the UN find anyone else to handle the situation? It just looks bad on the surface, even if he is sincere.
Goldstone investigated war crimes in South Africa, the Balkans in the 90s and Darfur recently.
Todd, I respectfully disagree –only someone of Goldstone’s standing and pedigree could have taken on such an incendiary assignment. Goldstone has more balls than Obama for sure. By the way, did you read the Goldstone Report? No punches pulled.
US_Objector, a comment below that HuffPo story you cite hits it on the nail:
Is this sort of reporting from NPR a surprise? I have heard so many “reports from the kibbutz dining room” over the years presented as news from extended family that it was only a matter of time before the true nature of Israeli society were reported in sympathetic light.
I applaud those who complain, but my guess is that the complaints will only be used to gauge how blatant the propaganda can get. I wonder if average Americans will ever forcefully question the elites who are clearly working against our best interests in just about every way imaginable?
No, it’s not a surprise, Todd, but it’s certainly becoming obnoxious, especially those darling “reports from the kibbutz dining room,” as you call them. Why doesn’t NPR do that for France, or Belgium, or Senegal?
I see no reason for Madrid to second-guess himself, and I don’t believe that anyone at NPR was following Max Kellermann’s example. This just seems like more of NPR’s own brand of activist journalism. Who is ever in doubt about the message that an NPR reporter is driving at?
Great post, Susie Kneedler, well done! Thanks for unpacking NPR’s radio coverage, it was atrocious reporting.
Now, it’s not like I haven’t done my part. I have submitted to the Israeli regime my sure-fire plan for de-fusing the Palestinian Demographic Time Bomb! My detailed proposals for a program of Israeli-state sponsored promiscuity and suggestions on aids to boost flagging Israeli birth rate have gone unanswered. They haven’t returned the videos, though.
There is no doubt this entire crisis can be laid squarely at the feet of the closed thighs of Israeli women. And now they are going with Arab boys yet? Oy Gottennyu!
But Jeez, think about it, a group of Jewish/Israeli guys riding arouind in Jerusalem in a van, looking for Israeli girls hanging out with Arabs guys so they can stop and lecture them? Have you ever, ever heard a more perfect set up for a comedy movie? Written by Philip Roth and directed and starring Woody Allan.
There’s boffo yoks in that, I garauntee. “I wouldn’t be dating Arab boys if any of you Jewish guys could lose your obsession with your mom!”
It’s like “Don’t Mess with the Zohan” meets “West Side Story.”
With apologies to Bernstein and Soundheim (to the tune of “When You’re a Jet”)
“When you’re a Jewess,
Only Jews can you date,
If you go with Arabs
You won’t like your fate”!
Okay, look, I’m just running this up the flagpole to see who tries to light it on fire,
but you gotta admit, it’s got possiblilties, it’s a gelt-edged cert!
Please … God set the Jews aside as a chosen people. Their eternal duty is to enlighten the goyim and bring us goyim closer to God by following Jewish teachings. Not to BE Jews. Not to MONGRELIZE with jews, but to be bnai noach and follow the noachide laws. And NOT — repeat NOT — to study Torah. Race purity has been a central focus of Judaism and Jews for at least a thousand years.
For their part, God told Jews not to mongrelize with goyim. All these good Jewish men you castigate are doing is following the traditional and acceptable beliefs of the vast majority of loyal Jews by doing what they can to prevent the goyim from miscegenating with Jews, that’s all.
And comparisons to American whites mongrelizing with American blacks is inappropriate. God didn’t say anything about white goyim and black goyim shtupping, did he? Of course not! Goyim are goyim. Only Jews are to remain pure and undefiled by us goyim. And that’s the law no matter what the Reform or Conservative say (or “neo-Christians”as Rabbi Tendler calls them).
I don’t think this was atrocious reporting. Given the NPR audience it was probably not necessary to call these antimiscegenation vigilantes racists — most would surely see that for themselves. However, many of them probably were completely unaware of this story. Just presenting the bare bone facts through the words of the fanatics was certainly better than not reporting the story at all. I bet there were many who listened to this story if not in out right shock then certainly with discomfort .
NOw that you say this, it strikes me that you are right and that I overreacted. I think that 99% of NPR listeners did not need Frankel to confront the bigots to make it effective, although to be honest she did seem like she was agreeing with David and the 16 year old that was so afraid of “Arab men.”
If you go back and look at the Max Blumental pieces on ‘Feeling the Hate’ you see him letting them talk without confronting them with their obvious racism. That was effective. He carefully edited these interviews in ways that left the audience with an unambiguous message. NPR is obviously much more constrained in how these interviews could be edited.
Why didn’t Sheera Frenkel try and interview some of the Jewish “girls” who go out with “Arab men”? If she brought this piece to one of my journalism 101 classes without speaking to them she would have failed the assignment. And aren’t these dating efforts between occupiers and occupied at least as interesting as the vigilantes?
I would have at least gotten their phone numbers, and asked if they had a sister, or if their Mom was divorced.
Madrid,
I dont think you over-reacted, syvanen’s intelligent reply notwithstanding. I am glad you called and wrote afterward. Mainly because of this at the end: Finally, let’s consider American values here– what does the American experience teach us about racists who go around trying to patrol the purity of ethnic boundaries? Shouldn’t American public radio reflect American values (not rightwing Israeli values)?
NPR has had it’s nose so far up Israel’s ass of late – make that years – that it doesn’t seem to realize how offensive ramming Israel’s right-wing, racist, exclusionary, and victimized religious gobbledegook down our throats has become. I dont thrill to their stories of settlement entitlement; I find them appalling. I’m not charmed by stories of expat Americans who think 19th C colonization, and murdering the people you displace or control with abandon, is your right by your reading of Bible…and that somehow American listeners are supposed to find that acceptable. Somehow or other, American listeners are supposed to drop every basic thing that this country believes in: the separation of church and state, equality, etc. etc. and grant Israel a factual pass.
Israel stories on NPR elicit the same tedium from me now that the plethora of Holocaust movies do, or the Movie of the Week extravaganzas that demonize ‘Arabs’ or whoever the favorite Muslim group is that we’re supposed to hate.
I’m glad you called and wrote, Madrid. My hat’s off to you. Maybe someone could direct Ms. Shepherd to this site for some cold water on her face. It’s about time someone at NPR remembered the ‘Public’ in their moniker: we have way too many horror stories happening here at home, and too many desperate things that need to be fixed, to give a racist country locked in the Middle Ages that much play.
The point being that Israel is never criticized for their behavior on a NPR show. Never.
“American listeners are supposed to drop every basic thing that this country believes in: the separation of church and state, equality, etc. etc. and grant Israel a factual pass.”
As far as I know, most Americans don’t believe in those things ant more, but one would hope that NPR listeners do.
BTW, great post, Susie.
We can’t excuse Frenkel’s omissions by the traditional alibi of “objectivity,” for there’s nothing “fair” about her approach.
I’d rephrase that. The way the objectivity rules are understood and applied and overstretched often leads to omissions,
judgements and reasonings that cannot be included as soon as there is something contentious about them.
A journalist can’t say things like “officials claim this, but considering this and that fact, the claim is most likely false and a lie”. Explaining the palestinian side when mainstream opinion is against them is also contentious,
hence objectivity kicks in. It’s possible to claim that the objectivity rule is misapplied, but my preference goes to adapting the rule.
“US_Objector October 13, 2009 at 8:54 pm
Todd, I respectfully disagree –only someone of Goldstone’s standing and pedigree could have taken on such an incendiary assignment. Goldstone has more balls than Obama for sure. By the way, did you read the Goldstone Report? No punches pulled. ”
You may be right about Goldstone’s report, USO. I’ll admit that I lost interest in reading it when I heard Goldstone refered to as a Zionist Jew who has Israel’s best interests at heart.
Credit where credit is due, while Goldstone did everything he could in his own words to soften and whitewash what Israel did, he did at least present the facts without distortion.
In a sense, that’s what makes the report so valuable. An avowed Zionist crafted it, and it still shows that Israel needs to be investigated and, very probably, prosecuted for crimes against humanity.
And for being true to his integrity and idealism, the Israel that he’s supported denounces and rejects him. Like I keep saying, Zionists are a Jew’s worst enemies.
How did Goldstone whitewash or soften Israel’s actions? Is it a good thing that he did so?
Of course, I’ll never forget the wonderful generosity with which my wife’s parents greeted her marriage to a Jew. (Well, half- Jew, half Moose, but what am I supposed to do, kill myself?) Her mother immediately said “When you two get married, you can come and live in this house”
My bride-to-be said: “Ma, this is a small place” (it’s actually been extensively enlarged from the original refrigerator box which forms the main quarters) “There’s not enough room”
My darlink MIL replied: “There will be, as soon as you say ‘I do’ I’m sticking my head in the oven!”
Oh, stop me if you’ve heard this one before, I wouldn’t want to bore you.
But Gosh, what has happened to our vaunted (by Citizen and America Fust-Cless, anyway) Jewish insularity? These girls are in Israel, for Christ’s sake, and they can’t wait to go out and get some Arab schvantz? You call that insularity, already? That’s your cohesiveness?
But of course, that’s the worst thing about Jews, their damned inconsistency!
LOL
I’ll never forget how my MIL warned my wife that if she ever brought me over
MIL would “pour hot boiling chicken soup on his goyischakopf!”
That’s actually a very high compliment.
To be fair, Mooser, what Citizen and AF are reacting to, I would think, is the so-called “silent Holocaust” campaign that is a reaction to events such as this whereby the “purity” of the Jewish people, as Zionists understand it, is violated.
This is why I keep insisting there is a difference between actual mainstream Jews, and Zionists. There’s a gulf between the two groups that is getting ever wider.
“There’s a gulf between the two groups that is getting ever wider.”
There is a chasm which will open up as soon as the mainstream Jews are given a voice. It is a tragedy, but true, that a Jew who becomes disgusted by Zionism ceases, for all practical purposes, to be a Jew. And the perception of Jewish cohesiveness is so strong in Gentiles (as we see here all the time) that they assume that any organisation or project which calls itself” Jewish” must have the consent and support of the overwhelming majority of Jews. And, as I have pointed out, many Gentiles who are used to more centralised religious institutions do not appreciate the religious anarchy which obtains in Judaism, and it’s consequences.
Of course, I wouldn’t have it any other way. I could never join any religion which would accept me.
Whoops, went off the rails! Yes, there is a gulf, and it will widen into a chasm when the other Jews are given a voice. Could Mondoweiss be that voice? Not without a theme-song, it won’t. I’ll get right on it!
Maybe it’s a physiological difference, between the mainstream Jew and the Zionist?
It’s a congenital condition which make some Jews react differently to ziocaine.
I admit it, I tried ziocaine once. It was no good, I had a bum voyage. Anyway, I got so screwed up I tried to take my pants off. Over my head!
Never tried it again.
I have to confess I see what you mean about the notion of centralised religious institutions. Being raised Catholic I’ve seen that mentality as it applies to a religion that is strictly organized and hierarchical, and I’ve found it a bit odd that this attitude still pervades branches of Christianity that long since splintered off from Rome (ostensibly in some cases as an open rejection of that sort of hierarchy, or perhaps the corruption for which it can serve as a breeding ground).
The Zionist (Jewish, Christian and secular, one is reminded) caricature of Islam goes along the same lines. It’s like Americans believe subconsciously in a “Muslim pope,” often assigning that role to whatever the Muslim target of the day happens to be — Osama bin Laden, Saddam Hussein (arguably a thoroughly secular figure), the Saudi nobility, the Ayatollah and/or the President of Iran, etc.
I suppose it plays into the Western (though perhaps, more accurately this applies universally to humanity) preconceived notion that there is that one great person behind it, good or evil — Abraham Lincoln, Alexander the Great, Napoleon, Hitler — etc. who is absolutely indispensable. I’ve taken to calling it the “Cobra Commander” mentality — the idea that there’s one insane puppet master pulling the strings, and if you decapitate the proverbial hydra the whole monster falls dead.
Of course, mythology being an reliable teaching device for life’s lessons, when Heracles decapitated the hydra willy-nilly, he only managed to double its strength with each blow.
My experience in Israel is that Israelis of both genders chase foreigners, but it is only acceptable when the men do so. I even had Israeli men tell me that you aren’t a man until you’ve had relations with a blonde Gentile. Watching the men on the kibbutz drool over hearing that a new group of Scandinavian women would be arriving soon (the women were in their late teens and early 20s and the men were 30, 40 and 50 somethings!) was both sad and disgusting, and when you consider the fact that several of the kibbutz members were caught (although the kibbutz elders claimed that it was a misunderstanding!) peeking in the womens’ showers, there is something odd about the relationship between Israelis and others. One Israeli girl on the kibbutz even told me that the girls weren’t allowed to be around the “volunteers.”
The funny thing about Israel is that Israelis would drive great distances by Israeli standards to see foreigners that they hardly knew. It wasn’t uncommon to see a soldier on leave drive literally half the length of the country to see a girl that he met once and remembered the name of the kibbutz where she was staying–and expecting sparks to fly too! Israeli girls would do the same thing! I remember more than a few cases of Israeli girls traveling several towns over by bus to meet foreign boys out of fear of what their fathers would think, and doing so on a regular basis.
I guess that’s what happens in closed societies where outsiders are very much outsiders.
On the other hand, I don’t think that the Palestinians would welcome foreign men behaving towards Palestinian women the way that Palestinian men often behaved towards foreign women. I heard many stories about the poor behavior from women who travelled in majority Muslim areas, and especially in Egypt. The stories I heard from UN soldiers serving in Lebanon about upholding the honor of women were scary.
Remember, Todd, you are fighting for this women’s honor, which is more than she ever did!
I’m not sure your comment is really in the best of taste. My Rabbi told me a Jew doesn’t kiss and tell, or schtup and run. But we were Reform, so YMMV.
I’m not refering to anyone that I had relations with. Those experiences are wholesome and sacred.
Well look, I gotta go, but if you want me to do the research and scouting for that film about the Israeli Chastity Patrols, I’ll need about $500,000 to get started. I would fly to Israel, and then just keep on going. Get yourself another sucker, guys, I wouldn’t touch it with a ten foot Pole.
Wow. Just saw the interview.
At first I was willing to accept that Moyer’s questions were him playing devil’s advocate — getting Goldstone to refute his critics by repeating their logic. But then it became so unrelenting… out of the maybe 30 questions asked by Moyers, 27 were defenses of Israel in the form of a question. It skewed the entire discussion away from talking about the great depth and of Israeli injustices.
Comments on this entry are closed.