On Saturday night I flew business class to Qatar for the Doha debates. I always fly economy, but as the saying goes, I could get used to this fast. The seats on the Boeing 777 folded down to make a full bed and I was next to a guy from Cesar Pelli’s architectural firm. At the Four Seasons in Doha, I sent my wife an email. “They have Occitane soap in the bathroom.” “Life is good,” she responded. A BMW took me to and from the souk.
The debate was over the proposition, Obama is too weak to bring about Middle East peace, and I argued the affirmative along with a guy from American University of Beirut named Ahmed Moussali. He was unshaven and chain-smoked and kept the other side off balance in the green room by making fun of their clothing and telling scatological jokes. They were both courtly men, Roger Cohen of the New York Times and Sami Abu Roza of the Palestinian Authority. Abu Roza had longish hipster hair and a German-inflected accent from a youth in Europe. Cohen has an English accent and opened the debate by speaking with fervor about Obama’s character and strength. Moussali promptly undercut him by saying the question was not about whether we love Obama or don’t love him.
He and Cohen clashed a lot during the debate. It wasn't just a difference in manners, but in world views.
Moussali talked about the right of return. He said Arabs were made to pay the price for European crimes of World War II, and 1 million Russians moved to Palestine when people who were born there cannot visit their former village. He said that Palestinians ended up with less than 22 percent of the land. Cohen was dismissive of that view. He said we cant keep dwelling on history and trying to outvictimize one another. Cohen had just been in the West Bank. He said to Moussali, When is the last time you have been in the West Bank? He spoke about how much progress the Palestinians were making economically with reduced checkpoints, and he said that Salam Fayyad says the Palestinians are trying to build something and go forward. Cohen was saying that Moussali and I are stuck in the past.
Before the debate Cohen and I had met in the Four Seasons lobby and both regretted that we were on opposite sides. He’s been a leader in American mainstream journalism; and I have several times celebrated him here, for saying that he was ashamed of Israel’s conduct in Gaza, for his personal courage in Iran last year, for attacking neoconservatives on the craziness of the idea of attacking Iran.
Still I don’t know how a liberal can say that it is a good thing for people who are denied basic political rights and human rights to accept a hot lunch of economic progress. The Boston tea party was about that. Palestinians want freedom, to come and go, and not to live with separate roadways for Jews who are steadily taking more of their land. I talked about East Jerusalem and the creation of ethnically-cleansed Jewish neighborhoods that memorialize Israel’s annexation of an international city, a violation that happens not in the past but under our noses.
Strategizing that afternoon over espresso at the Four Seasons, Moussali had told me to tell the audience that this debate doesn't happen in the U.S. There is not a panel that pitted Cohen and Abu Roza on the right and me and Moussali on the left. Indeed, later this week Cohen will be debating a neocon at the American Jewish Committee on the vital question of Iran (the same debate Cohen won handily at a synagogue in New York last year), but no American stage explores the difference between his views and mine, between his attachment to the two-state solution and my own strong feeling that Israel, a democracy that denies leadership to 20 percent of its population, must be reformed. Between his concern for the civil rights demonstrators murdered in Iran, with endless attention in the US, and my concern for the civil rights demonstrators murdered by Israel without a squeak from our press.
It was a foregone conclusion that our side would win, 58-42. Moussali told me if the debate were held in Syria it would have been 90-10.
I sat up late at the Four Seasons talking with friends from Saudi and Palestine, both highly educated and well off. The Saudi had lately given me the book, Imagined Communities, Benedict Anderson's classic about nationalism, and the Palestinian had read it in grad school. He told me that the negotiating team for the Palestinians always gets along with the Israelis, because “elites always get along with one another.”
I thought about that bit of wisdom for the next day. Of course elites do. When you are at the Four Seasons and discussing the history of nationalism, you get along. And as a Jew, I am accustomed to thinking in such terms. I’m a member of an elite. Israel’s Reut Institute says frankly that Israel needs to personally cultivate the "entire [American] elite" in culture, arts, politics and academia to maintain its status. And Fayyad is the elite of Palestinian society. Roger Cohen and I both went to fancy schools and lead privileged lives in the US, and surely some of his love for Iran had to do with the education levels of the protesters.
On the trip back I rolled my seat down, drank Bourdeaux, and watched Avatar till it got too boring. I saw it as others have, a parable for the US relationship to the Arabs-- its glorification of an indigenous people tied to the land (the Nabi) and of the American “grunt” hero who is up against the pencil-necked elites. A Jew couldn’t write a movie from the vantage point of a jarhead, I thought. Well I couldn’t.
But during the debate I had been the most forceful on the issue of Palestinian conditions, about life in East Jerusalem and Gaza. On my left I saw Sami Abu Roza nodding his head in agreement. We’re both good guys. Somehow I think the Palestinians also need others to represent them.
What? Phil agrees that Israel is a democracy (albeit one that needs to reform)?
I am sure many people will leave this blog now. How can Phil be so blind? Israel is a “racist and fascist” state. How can it be a democracy?
When God handed out quote marks, He gave lot’s extra to the Zionists.
Oops, sorry 3e, I don’t mean to make disparaging remarks about your religion.
Avatar? Had one since 2001. A wonderful bike. One of the best all-rounders, ever. Much favored, from what I’ve read, in Europe and England, but not a big seller in the US. Produced from 1998-2005, with minor revisions in 2001(?)
“Cohen was dismissive of that view. He said we cant keep dwelling on history and trying to outvictimize one another. “
The entire raison d’etre for Israel is ‘dwelling on history’. The West Bank settlers justify their actions by ‘dwelling on history’. Netanyahu made it clear at the UN (2009) that his actions in the 21st C were the result of his re-definitions of ‘dwelling on history’.
Cohen needs to lecture those people first.
Not to mention that those he accuses of “dwelling on history” are literally doing so, suffering due the historic crimes and exile imposed on them by Israel to this day.
Cohen is the perfect example of the phony liberal Zionist.
A concern for Palestinian rights here, a dismissal of “Israel’s excess” there, but when it comes to the heart of the ugliness of the Zionist project, he is squarely in the camp of the ethnic cleansing supporters.
What is the difference between Cohen and the stated position of most Americans that the injustices committed towards the Native Americans, Mexicans, etc. are irreversible?
“you suck”
#2 I think.
the stated position of most Americans that the injustices committed towards the Native Americans, Mexicans, etc. are irreversible?
Do you have a source for this?
I have a hard time believing that a majority of Americans actually said what you claim them to say.
Especially since you have shown irrational US hatred in the past.
How many Americans would say yes to the following questions:
1) Should Texas, New Mexico, California and Arizona be returned to Mexico?
2) The the plain States be returned to the Plain Indians?
Maybe 1%?
It is not the “you suck” argument. It is the following positive argument:
Just as it does not make sense to return the plain states to the Native Americans it does not make sense to grant the right of return.
Cohen is right. Dwelling on the past will lead to nowhere.
In case you weren’t aware, all Native Americans are citizens of the US. The right of return merely gives the Palestinians expelled from Israel the same rights that the US granted to the Native Americans nearly one hundred years ago. So you are arguing that something that the US managed to do a century ago doesn’t make sense.
And if dwelling on the past doesn’t make sense, in your view, then why do you spend so much energy bringing up past US offenses? If you are going to argue inconsistently, no one will give your arguments any weight, and frankly, they won’t deserve any.
Tree,
In case you were not aware, the Native American population underwent ethnic cleansing and genocides for hundreds of years before a completely weakened and decimated people were granted citizenship and nothing else. Your great president, Andrew Jackson himself sponsored the Indian Removal Act.
link to en.wikipedia.org
Is that why he is on the 20 dollar bill?
I am bringing up US past offences to show that you are an hypocrite. It either makes sense to dwell on both the US and Israel’s past offences or on neither’s past offences. Which path do you choose?
Which begs the question: Why should Palestinians give up their land to people from Eastern block countries who claim they’re the descendants of people who used to live in Palestine 3000 years ago?
Why should the Palestinians return any land at all to people who’ve been missing for 3000 years??
In case you’re not aware, eee, the Native American population did not undergo ethnic cleansing and genocides for hundreds of years. You get your history from Wikipedia and know nothing about American history, as most Americans dont. (double negative, what the hell)
Spain controlled the majority of this country until 1803 (Louisiana Purchase—Spain gave the land it won back to France so France would sell to Jefferson, and get the money to bury the British). The United States of America existed on the east coast, thirteen colonies. It was the Gaza strip to the Spanish nation.
I dont give a shit what kind of fairy tales you insist on conjuring up here about what Americans did to the Indians, but you have absolutely no sense of the history of it, or the part of the Spanish in it. The Indian nations, which did exist all over the North American continent at the time of the Spanish Conquistadores, and the French invasion of Canada (who were particularly cruel), eventually signed TREATIES with the American government which makes their land sovereign within the US. Their reservations exist, in most instances, outside of US law. Some have made deals for US roads to go through them, like the Apache nation in Arizona for example, for which they get annual payments. It’s an uneasy peace in some cases as well. The federal government does go on their land to make arrests if an Indian does something in a US jurisdiction that warrants it, but the feds have no right to make arrests there. They have to wait until the Indian leaves the res.
Leave invoking US history to those who know about it. You’re not doing a good job of it.
America is a Spanish word, not an English one.
And another thing: North, Central, and South America ought to give you some idea of the size of the Spanish nation that you have no clue about, and that most Americans know nothing about because they are not forced to learn this language in school; and hence, their history.
And another, another thing. The United States of America is only 233 years old.
The Spanish nation that preceded it was 289 years old — older than the US — up till the time of the Louisiana Purchase (1803), and 339 years old up till 1853 when the now-states of CA, TX, AZ etc ceded to the USA in war.
[The only reason the USA has cows and horses is because the Spaniards brought them here (so much for the rugged western cowboy individualist). They were not indigenous. Buffalo were.]
EEE- The ethnic cleansing of the American Indians is a shameful episode in U.S. history that ended over one-hundred years ago. The ethnic cleansing of the Palestinians is a shameful reality of Zionism that is still occurring, and seems to be intensifying. No one here defends the battle of Wounded Knee. You, however, gloat over the massacre of Operation Cast Lead. You are a hypocrite’s hypocrite, totally without shame.
>> It either makes sense to dwell on both the US and Israel’s past offences or on neither’s past offences.
Ah, so that’s the ploy: Israel continues to commit offences today BUT if you babble just long enough, today becomes tomorrow and then today’s offences are “past offences” that can be excused because the U.S. did something in 1863.
What a joke(r).
actually MRW I think it’s Italian. Amerigo Vespucci. A Florentine working for the Spanish. otherwise, continue.
Keith,
Answer the simple question:
It either makes sense to dwell on both the US and Israel’s past offences or on neither’s past offences. Which path do you choose?
As for the ethnic cleansing of the Native Americans, why aren’t they given the right to return to their original lands?
I thought so too, marc b., for years and years. Until I started digging and reading copious amounts of history in English and Spanish and docs and the antique (!) maps from the fabulous collection at the University of Texas. I think they came up with the Amerigo thing — really amplified during the Tall Ships sailing in 1976 — to justify saying that Christopher Columbus discovered America, which of course is an absolute falsity. He never set foot on the US. It was Juan Ponce de Leon, the Jewish nobleman from NW Spain (1514).
Did you ever see this op-ed? Didn’t get much reading at the time because it was behind the NYT firewall that year.
link to nytimes.com
They are on their original lands, eee, by treaty. Jesus, you’re poorly read.
We aren’t talking about the past, eee. We are talking about what Israel does today. We can stop talking about the ethnic cleansing of Palestinians when Israel corrects the situation and stops treating the Palestinians as lesser human beings, and stops stealing their land and violating their human rights. Until then, the only way to change that is to keep bringing it up, and criticizing it. Why don’t you do something useful and start working on fixing the problem instead of coming up with reasons why things can’t change?
I am bringing up US past offences to show that you are an hypocrite.
No, you are bringing up US past offenses to because you have no valid argument, and because you are a hypocrite who likes to criticize others but won’t stand for criticism of your own country and its faults. This is all an attempt at distraction on your part. You have no interest in fairness or justice, you just want to keep your affinity group’s privileges and sense of superiority, even at the expense of others’ basic human rights.
You do serve one good purpose here. You show the paucity and vacuity of Zionist arguments.
Are you joking?
Very few tribes are on their own land.
link to en.wikipedia.org
Just as one example, The Eastern Tribes were moved west in the Indian removal act. The reservations given to Indians were a very small portion of their original land and quite often the US would tear up the treaties and force new ones making the Native Americans do with less and less land.
Tree,
No, you are talking about the past. You claim that the Palestinians underwent ethnic cleansing in 1948 and deserve the right of return, no?
I would like to know, why the Native Americans that were cleansed by your government do not deserve the right of return?
As for the ethnic cleansing of the Native Americans, why aren’t they given the right to return to their original lands?
Any Native American can legally live or own land anywhere in the US. Ethnically cleansed Palestinians can not return to their homes, nor can they legally reside in Israel, nor are they considered citizens of Israel. When those conditions change for the Palestinians, then a comparison of the present day Palestinians to the present day Native Americans would be valid. Otherwise you are just dwelling on the past, and diverting the argument. Or do you think that the Native Americans should not have been given US citizenship?
I would like to know, why the Native Americans that were cleansed by your government do not deserve the right of return?
Jeez, you really are an idiot. Native Americans are US citizens. They can travel freely in the US, vote in US elections, own homes and land. In other words, they are full citizens with the same rights as every other US citizen . They are here already. When Israel gets to the same point with the ethnically cleansed Palestinians, then get back to me with this. Otherwise you are only showing your profound ignorance.
And I’m saying that Israel is CONTINUING to this day to rob Palestinians of their lands and their rights. TODAY. One of which is the right of return.
interesting article MRW.
It was Juan Ponce de Leon, the Jewish nobleman from NW Spain (1514).
there is a lot rich Jewish history in the Spanish Americas. two great books if you have the time and interest.
Atlantic Diasporas: Jews, Conversos, and Crypto-Jews in the Age of Mercantilism, 1500–1800
The Martyr: Luis de Carvajal, A Secret Jew in Sixteenth-Century Mexico (Jewish Latin America
“Jeez, you really are an idiot. Native Americans are US citizens. They can travel freely in the US, vote in US elections, own homes and land. In other words, they are full citizens with the same rights as every other US citizen . They are here already. When Israel gets to the same point with the ethnically cleansed Palestinians, then get back to me with this. Otherwise you are only showing your profound ignorance.”
Yes, I understand, first you kill many Native Americans, then you relocate them killing even more, and then when there are very few left, you give them citizenship and rights. But you did not give them their original land back. Why do the Native Americans not deserve to get their old lands back?
The Wiyot people are an excellent example of what I mean.
link to en.wikipedia.org
“This rapid decline in population was from disease, slavery, target practice, protection, being herded from place to place (survivors’ descendants describe this as “death marches”), and massacres.”
When will all the Wiyot territory be returned to the Wiyot people?
Thanks, marc b. That first one looks fascinating. I’m going to save the titles. Someone just came out with a book about the Jewish Caribbean, which it became after Queen Isabella got rid of anyone who wasn’t Catholic. (She desperately wanted the Pope to move from Italy.) Even though the Ashkenazis like to co-opt the Sephardics as evidence of centuries! eras! eons! of Jewish persecution, the Meanie Queenie actually had it out for the Muslims, so she dumped them first.
At the moment I am working on Shmuel’s reading list. The Book is about 12 in thick (2 in actually). ;-)
Shmuel’s reading list
I missed that. Could you (re)post it? I am waiting on a biography of Uriel Da Costa, and selected writings of Ahad Ha’am. I sure hope that the ‘Jewish Century’ doesn’t wind down too quickly or all this learing will have gone to waste. I should probably be practicing Mandarin.
marc b.
I was being vaguely sarcastic. ;-) Shmuel doesn’t have an assigned reading list. He just recommended books to me as we went along and I ordered them. Only one has shown up. It took over fourmonths to get here. “Lords of the Land: The War for Israel’s Settlements in the Occupied Territories, 1967-2007″
Idith Zertal, Akiva Eldar
I’m beginning to think that you a plant from wikipedia, otherwise you wouldn’t keep posting links to it as if we are all ignorant.
Obviously, though, you don’t read the links you post. From your link.
In a step towards making amends, in June 2004 the Eureka City Council transferred 40 acres (160,000 m2) of Indian Island back to the Wiyot tribe, to add to 1.5 acres (6,100 m2) the Wiyot had purchased.[14]. The council also transferred 60 acres (240,000 m2) on the northeast tip of the 275-acre (1.11 km2) island on May 18, 2006. [15]
The tribal chairwoman who headed the negotiations for years and eventually succeeded, Cheryl Seidner, is a descendant of an ancestor who survived the 1860 massacre as an infant.[16] [17] Tuluwat, the sacred Wiyot village of Indian Island, is currently being restored by the Wiyot tribe. Eureka businesses have stepped forward to donate supplies and trash barges, and the citizens of Eureka have donated to a Tuluwat restoration fund. It is hoped that soon the Wiyot will be able to once again perform their traditional world renewal ceremony upon the island, perhaps by 2008.
So let me get this straight. You think what was done to the Native Americans in the past was OK? Cuz that appears to be your argument, paltry as it is. After all, by your logic, the Wiyot foolishly refused a compromise and lost a war, so tough nougies, right? Or does that kind of “logic” of yours only apply to Palestinians? Why are you criticizing things from the past that you find totally acceptable when done by your affinity group today?
Are you getting paid by the wiki link? Or are you just paid to repeat ad nauseum stupid and immoral argumentation?
I was being vaguely sarcastic
and apparently i was being vaguely dense. i got lords of the land. have yet to read it though. that’s what happens when you (meaning me) pull your head out of your ass late in life. you spend all your time trying to catch up.
MRW — and Ponce de Leon was born in the Levant, lived there all his life, went to Jewish university in Judea-Samaria, paid his taxes to the land that supported him with a government, roads, military, education systems, all Jewish, right? That’s right, isn’t it?
PGod,
Ponce de Leon came from Valladolid in NW Spain, which was the seat of the Jewish population and Jewish nobility. (There’s also a town called Leon right beside it, which is undoubtedly where the name comes from.) We never hear about the Jewish Spanish nobility, and their longevity in that country, because it runs counter to the ‘persecution for 2,000/3,000′ years story. I mean, people are still trying to pass off First lady Queen Isabella’s expulsion of the Jews after the Muslims as part of that motif, when it was nothing of the kind. (see above.)
All of this has been documented with birth, death, and marriage records.
marc b. Thanks for that book on the conversos – I’ll order it – b een looking for material on this really interesting bit of histo0ry for quite a while. Apparently quite a few of the conversos and descendants intermarried with native Indians.
marc b. and PGod, watch this video of Tony Horwitz on PBS. Short. About 8 min max.
link to pbs.org
MRW,
your ‘facts’ about the Reservations are entirely wrong. For your information here is a link outlining federal jurisdiction on the Res.
link to tribal-institute.org
Also for more information on US roads:
link to flh.fhwa.dot.gov
The Res, even those with fledgling casinos are really horrible. I remember a trip back from the west coast, I was driving through Rose Bud, which coincidently President Clinton was visiting at the same time during his tour of the poorest places in America. I believe the unemployment rate was 75%.
Ironic, yonira, considering the horrible conditions on Native American reservations (something you’ve actually gotten right for a change) is exactly the sort of circumstances you wish to consign the Palestinians to — a phony sort of “two state” independence.
I don’t really think the two would be at all similar Chaos. First of all, there would be true sovereignty for the Palestinians. Secondly the international community as a whole would spend an unprecedented amount of money to assure the Palestinian community flourishes. Thirdly, the Palestinian people seem like they are much more resilient than our own Native population on the Res, once the occupation was no longer a concern, they could focus all of the intellect, time, and energy on becoming a player in the world. The Native population has given up on this after 200 years of tribal lifestyle. Fourthly, the Palestinian community, although spread out, is basically in tact. The native americans on the reservation are actually a minority, most has assimilated into US culture. A large majority of their population was wiped out, what is left is merely a remnant of what they used to be, both numerically and in terms of cultural integrity. Those who are on the reservation, for the most part, are elderly or are less capable of succeeding in our society. Fifthly, the Palestinians have core Muslim beliefs, which will for the most part lead them away from the many vices which have plagued the reservations.
For once, you make an intelligent case.
The one thing you leave out — what exactly is going to stop Israel from bombing the Palestinians and invading all over again? Or attacking their economic trade? I don’t see we have any reasonable assurances that Israel will stop.
Just look at Lebanon — every time they build up and threaten to become a competitive country, Israel finds an excuse to bomb the whole country, from border to border. And now that Iran is an economic threat (certainly moreso than any sort of military threat), Israel wants to open up on them with the air strikes too.
The problem with the two state solution that I see, is it leaves a violent, expansionist, militant state with an established history of state terror and apartheid, intact.
A two state solution would give Israel the security it demands. Israel hasn’t attacked Egypt or Jordan since they made peace with Israel. If Israel gets the security they demand and still find the need to bomb the Palestinians, then fuck them, you guys were right all along.
The international community, with a two state solution, would not allow Israel to attack. There would be real sanctions against Israel if they were to attack after a peaceful settlement.
Instead of using UN Peace Keepers, a MFO like that set up after peace between Egypt and Israel could be setup (link to en.wikipedia.org
But instead of being strictly western countries it could be a combination of NATO and Arab league members to ensure equality. Again if Israel decides to attack, this wouldn’t be a force like that in Lebanon, but a force with some teeth.
Again, $$$$ would be king, the integration of the two economies, slowly at first but more rapidly after trust is built could lead to a true peace and eventually an integration of the two communities, with truly open borders much like the EU.
Yonira,
Your links do not contradict what I wrote quickly at all. From your first link:
Your second link to the DoT shows nothing other than confirming that the US govt DOES contract with the tribes for road and bridges.
All of this, however, can be overridden by treaty, should it have been memorialized that way, as was the case with the tribes in Arizona, the ones that border the Finger Lakes area of NY, etc.
While your description of the reservations may be accurate from one point-of-view (and certainly it’s the view of the majority of Americans), you have a White Man’s view of their conditions, and how you think they are faring, and what their place is in the world.
I had to unlearn my common prejudices about Indian life on a reservation over a three-year period that I was working with them; I had to undo what I considered to be wealth and success; and I had to overlook (and it was hard) certain conditions, which I found ingrained in me as indicative of a level of poverty when it was not the case. Alcohol. however, is a problem on the reservations.
Well, eee, I think it makes a lot sense, but then again, I actually took to heart the Nuremberg Trial principles and the international treaties developed subsequently in light of them. Not to mention, there’s been two world wars fought since the days of the Mexican-American and Indian wars. It’s called painful progress. What Israel does is ignore the 20th Century–except the Shoah part of it. We are already into a decade of the 21st Century. Why do you insist
on going back to the stone age to immunize Israel from internationally recognized accountibility for its actions? Oh yeah, you told us: you think basic universal human rights constitute a pipe dream. The reality is tribal priority, ultimately a zero sum game. Funny, that didn’t work too well for the German and Japanese defendants in the docks after WW2.
Yet you think it will continue to work for Israel. Now, that’s what I call “Never Again!”
Eee, the concept of genocide was not legislated by any state or international body until 1948, ironically the year of birth of Israel.
A major defense at Nuremberg was illegal application of ex post facto princiles of law. It didn’t help the German or Japanese defendants. That was a watershed. Either those principles apply to Israeli activity, or they do not; if you say they don’t, then you justify Hitler’s POV now, hence the SHOAH. You say you do this to secure Israel. No irony there. Why hasn’t the Armenian debacle been recognized by Israel or the US as an example of
now normalized application of ex post facto law? Did the USA commit genocide on the native Americans? You say yes. How many natives died from inadvertently imported European diseases in both N and S America? Lots, the bulk actually. Anyway, I agree alleged past genocide by whites in the USA
should be discussed continually in the USA MSM, and surely you also agree said MSM should start discussing alleged genocide going on NOW, and for decades now, by Israel against the natives of Palestine? And even more so, because Israel has done what it has done to the Palestines since the concept of genocide has been internationally recognized. Agree?
PS: Here’s some info supporting US genocide of the native Americans (with one exception, before WW 1 & 2 & before recognition of genocide as a legally viable international concept):
link to enotes.com
RE: “A two state solution would give Israel the security it demands. Israel hasn’t attacked Egypt or Jordan since they made peace with Israel.”
Last time I looked, both Egypt and Jordan had a full array of
military force, including armies and air forces, etc. I’ve not seen any US or Israeli peace proposal that would allow an independent Palestine any military force, except local cops–you know, like the
cops who were the first to be murdered en masse by the IDF in the recent Gaza turkey shoot?
cohen’s “courage” in Iran?
there is no place on the planet that an American is safer than in Iran. Iranian gov’t are acutely aware that if an American suffers a hangnail in Iran, the US govt will drop a load of shit the size of Israel on Iran’s head.
save it for the stoopids, Phil. we know better.
That, coupled with the irony that his Zionist friends in Israel and the occupied territories and in New York continue to talk about events that took place 3000 years ago and certainly continue to mention events that took place in the 1940s in Europe to justify the continued ethnic cleansing of Palestine.
You see, Palestinians are expected to “Look Forward”, as Obama might say (on torture and Bush/Cheney crimes).
re MRW
YES!!
sheesh, what is Cohen smoking? What does Cohen-the-elite think we of the great unwashed are smoking that would have kept us from overhearing our betters mention once or twice that ‘Israel gots ta have THIS land ‘cuz it’s been theirs for evah.’
don’t insult us, cohen. we’re not as stupid as we vote.
Can we see the debate online or podcast?
Israel is a Democracy?
But according to a very recent poll, the majority of Israelis believe there are too many freedoms in what I consider this “so-called” Democracy.
link to haaretz.com
Israel has no Constitution for a specific reason: Zionism and Democracy are INCOMPATIBLE. Zionism is fragile and an unsustainable injustice. Zionism and Democracy in the same sentence is an oxymoron. Zionism and Democracy don’t mix!
Thanks for the report Phil. Boondoggles are o.k. to enjoy once in while, as long as one doesn’t make a habit of it. :)
I think your unease about being elite is misplaced. You conclude:
By “others” do you mean less liberal, less cosmopolitan, less successful? If so, they do, and that would be Hamas, no?
You indicate Cohen’s observation of economic progress and reduction in checkpoints in the West Bank. You disount it as a “hot lunch.” Do you agree with the assessment of economic progress in the West Bank? If so, that sounds like good news not to be dismissive of. It strikes me that economic progress is the key. Only with economic progress can a Palestinian state become viable. Only through economic progress can conditions emerge where the wall can ultimately be taken down and the two communities can live in peace?
I don’t know if this thought is valid, but here it is: If the Palestinians went about building their own state in the West Bank and Gaza with the same energy and inventiveness that the Jews went about forging their state, might they not be successful? Does looking for a solution in “just treatment” assume an ongoing dependent relationship to Israel. The concept of a two party solution suggests that the fight must be about making Palestine a self-sufficient and vibrant state, and worrying less about the injusticies wrought by Israel. Palestinians should focus on this. Israel should do more to enable this. The Arab states and the world community should do more to enable this. As I understand it, however, this is not what Hamas is about.
A sense of victimhood with the settlers is misplaced and is not a helpful narrative. Is it possible that the narrative of victimhood by, and on behalf of, Palestinians is also not helpful because it distracts from the true job at hand.
When you write about economic progress in the West Bank, why are you being totally dismissive of Gaza? Gaza has been isolated from the West Bank and is on total lockdown by Israel.
How can economic progress be the key when people are living in a prison?? Take the blinders off.
I don’t know if this thought is valid, but here it is: If the Palestinians went about building their own state in the West Bank and Gaza with the same energy and inventiveness that the Jews went about forging their state, might they not be successful? Does looking for a solution in “just treatment” assume an ongoing dependent relationship to Israel. The concept of a two party solution suggests that the fight must be about making Palestine a self-sufficient and vibrant state, and worrying less about the injusticies wrought by Israel.
Your thought shows a lack of knowledge of the history and consequences of the Israeli occupation. The West Bank and Gaza are economically distressed BECAUSE of the injustices of the Israeli occupation. For most of the 43 years of the Israeli occupation, Israel totally controlled economic development there, by limiting investment and denying permits required, by Israel, from any Palestinians wishing to set up any industry that might compete with Israeli industry. As per any colonialist enterprise, Israel wanted a captive market for their goods, and a cheap supply of labor, and so set about making the Palestinians dependent on Israel for its economic viability. Then, with Oslo, and slightly before, Israel started instituting its permit, closure and checkpoint system in the OT that limited the number of Palestinians able to legally work in Israel (Israel had decided it was cheaper and easier to import foreign workers), and at the same time further stunted any economic growth in the West Bank or Gaza. And the continual confiscation of Palestinian land to support more settlements and their growth zones has also severely stunted West Bank economic growth. The West Bank economy is only getting better now, to the extent that it is, because Israel has eased up a bit on its draconian restrictions. It is entirely up to the whim of Israel if it wants to reinforce those restrictions and crush the Palestinian economy again. The Palestinians are well educated and entirely capable of creating a vibrant state, if they were given the freedom to do so by Israel. The occupation has to end first, and ignoring that problem will not make it go away.
I could suggest you read Sara Roy’s “The Gaza Strip: The Political Economy of Dedevelopment”. Also, “Israel’s Occupation” by Neve Gordon, “Hollow Land: Israel’s Architecture of Occupation” by Eyal Weitzman, ” Palestine Inside Out: An Everyday Occupation” by Saree Makdisi, and “Disappearing Palestine: Israel’s Experiments in Human Despair”. Any and all of those will give you a good grasp of why your thought was incorrect. Also, I hear that Ilan Pappe is coming out with a book on the history of the Occupation, entitled “The Bureaucracy of Evil” , scheduled for release in October of this year.
Tree:
Thanks for the book list. I’ll take a look.
Bystander, in your vision of a better Palestine that should strive to imitate Israel’s successes, you didn’t say if the Palestinians could count on about 100 billions in American aid. Before getting carried away, there is no successful economic anything happening on the WB and any such claim is a joint Netanyahu-Fayad propaganda unless you are comparing the WB to Gaza.
I believe US aid to Israel to date is 6 trillion in direct aid, maybe double that if every aspect of the on-going “special relationship” is factored in–I do imagine the Pals could get up to par pretty quick with a good equal dose of such largely stringless aid.
Any reason why my posts are not appearing?
Not to worry; we all know what you’d say anyway.
Pingback: Tweets that mention RE In Doha, I struggle with my elitism -- Topsy.com
>> Any reason why my posts are not appearing?
I think they’re appearing under the name “Interested Bystander”… ;-)
The concept of a two party solution suggests that the fight must be about making Palestine a self-sufficient and vibrant state, and worrying less about the injusticies wrought by Israel. Palestinians should focus on this. Israel should do more to enable this. The Arab states and the world community should do more to enable this.
…
A sense of victimhood with the settlers is misplaced and is not a helpful narrative. Is it possible that the narrative of victimhood by, and on behalf of, Palestinians is also not helpful because it distracts from the true job at hand.
What a great scam. Tell them what they want to hear and the Arabs will fill your pockets with cash.
The Arabs ended up with far more than 20% of the land. They have Jordan and all the land and property of the million Jews evicted from Arab countries.
Julian, what business are you in? I dont know whether you are in Israel or the USA, but I would like to know what business you come to your comments by.
Er, Julian, how many Arabs live in the Middle East? More than 6 million? And how many of them came from Europe?
I did not know Doha was a paid gig. I like the show. The host asks tough questions and does not spare anyone. But, don’t worry Phil, you are not part of the elite anymore, you are just a working stiff who is barely making it.
Who the fuck are you to diss Phil Weiss? He’s been a ‘working stiff’ for longer than you have ever commented on this board, and his opinions are of value to a lot of people.
So what is it that you do in that coffin called Toronto, Rachel? What laudatory job do you hold?
Do you mean what laundry job?
“Moussali told me if the debate were held in Syria it would have been 90-10.”
Syria???! My, there’s a country with real freedom and real debate and real exposure to views other than what the government wants them to read and hear. Do they even pretend to have elections in Syria? Is that Moussali’s home turf? I mean Lebanon, which is under Syria’s thumb or is it under Hezbollah’s thumb (or is that the same) at least struggles with the concept of freedom, but Syria???
When it comes to freedom of expression there is very little difference between Syria’s treatment of its citizens and Israel’s treatment of its Palestinian citizens.
Funny how you seem to think all Arab countries suck.
Just to expand on that – you already know this, Chaos – Reporters without Borders releases an annual a freedom of press index for countries around the globe. The UAE, Lebanon and Kuwait came ahead of Israel.
link to en.rsf.org
While on their website, navigate your way to the homepage and scroll all the way to the bottom for a map of Predators. There, in the drop down menu the Israeli army is listed as one of the violators/predators, among countries like Iran, Korea, China, Libya, Saudi Arabia and others.
Pingback: In Doha, I struggle with my elitism Tree Me
If one believes that the I/P conflict can only be resolved with a Right of Return for the Palestinians, then indeed Obama is not nearly strong enough to bring a peace treaty to the conflict. Assuming that Obama remains in office until January 20, 2017 the issue of Iran’s nukes will probably come to a head somewhere along the line and assuming that Obama does not militarily attack Iran, he will be known to supporters of Israel as the man who stood by when Iran gained its nuclear capability. It is difficult to see that the conflict with Gaza and/or Lebanon can go another seven years without erupting again. He should work to calm the situation with Gaza, which certainly seems within the realm of the possible. As far as Lebanon is concerned, when sabers are rattling in 2010, it is hard to imagine that there can be avoidance of conflict for another six and a half years.
WJ, Obama needs to publically stand firm on stopping Israeli settlements. And he should visit Gaza. Then Tel Aviv. Then come back to the USA and talk over the heads of congress to the American people. And if he wishes to also discuss Iran with the American people, he should also point out to them Iran’s long record of not starting wars, and that Iran faces US troops on its borders, and has had a rather bad experience with the US’s Shah. And also discuss Israel’s nukes. The rest will take care of itself, once the American people get some real facts under their belts.
Warning to those who are tempted to engage Wondering Jew (or is it Meandering Jew?)! He would just take you everywhere from the desert to the sea talking about 160 irrelevant things but would barely touch the issue at hand.
You’ve been warned.
hello TGIA.
when witty played with your name, you yelled foul, but now?
Richard addressed me as theist which is the opposite of what I am. I’m suggesting ‘Meandering Jew’ because it describes the exchange we had where you thought you could take me for a ride by touching on multi facetted, multi layered subjects all beside the point, not the least being the literary merits of two “holy” books! Maybe that makes for a good conversation at a dinner table which I occasionally enjoy but certainly not for commentry on a given topic. To be honest with you I found that to be a bit off!
Besides, meandering has nothing insulting. Think of a bee or a butterfly, that kind of thing.
And, you as a moralist, took offense about a valid misinterpretation of your name?
Sorry, not your name, your mask.
I asked you if the misinterpretation was deliberate. You didn’t give me a clear answer. I also asked why did you chose ‘mask’ (implying malice) rather than ‘pseudo’ or ‘nic’. You didn’t answer.
Richard
I find the idea of being mistaken for a believer/theist a bit off too. Most atheists do. I have strong views on religion. I’m as much defined by my atheism as I’m defined by my humanism.
TGIA- “where you thought you could take me for a ride… all beside the point.” “nothing insulting.”
TGIA- you referred to me in the third person warning other of your like minded that they should avoid me, but there was nothing insulting.
You are being disingenuous.
And there was nothing meandering about my statement on this post. So try to stay on topic here and raise relevant points to what I was saying here.
Not getting there anymore, WJ. Learned my lesson.
It seems that Mondoweiss has a length filter on or something like that. I’ve posted three posts longer than a paragraph which each did not post, but short ones do.
No thinking allowed?
Mmmmm, maybe Phil installed a hasbara filter? Or maybe an abstract pomposity filter? If both, Witty, you won’t be getting on the Mondoweiss
express.