At Columbia University last night they had a panel about the coverage of Israel-Palestine, hosted by Campus Media Watch, a junior Israel lobby group. Free falafel dinner, free Campus Media Watch pens on every seat. It started out right enough, about the delegitimation of the Jewish people's right to a homeland. One neoconservative said that anti-Semites are behind media coverage that singles Israel out the same the same way a Sunday school teacher gets singled out for having an affair. Another said that Israel’s response in Gaza was just right, proportionate-- look, it stopped the rockets. A Christian Zionist in suspenders who used to work at fishing magazines said that Israel’s open media are “weaponizing” Israel's enemies globally by giving them information about Israel’s treatment of Palestinians.
Max Blumenthal kept cracking me up. He mimicked the Christian Zionist saying that the sharks are delegitimizing the dolphins, and he said the two neocons were shmegegges. That’s Yiddish for nobodies. They were both small men with complaining voices. I had that icky feeling I sometimes get that Zionism has called on the most crabbed part of Jewish character, the hunted powerless feeling. Kafka said that going to a Zionist meeting made him feel like a wooden clothes rack, "pushed into the middle of the room."
But then we got to the liberal side of the panel, beginning with Gershom Gorenberg. He said that journalists are professionals working on time constraints and everything you hear is true, from both sides, and it’s a very complicated situation. "As a religious person, I would say, I only know one objective source and he has not given a press conference in 3000 years." Great line.
Gorenberg's photo makes him look fey but I was surpised to see that he's anything but, he's thick and close to the ground and professional and a little hardheaded. He wears a yarmulke and has a thick gray beard you could lose a pencil in. Gorenberg moved to Israel from California for religious reasons 30 years ago and his rap is that both sides are victims. There came a spectacular statement of this philosophy last night when he referred to the expulsion of the Palestinians in '48-- the Nakba-- as the Palestinian “exodus.” It just came out. He elaborated that the purpose of journalism is to make something simple complex. I see his method: His book the Accidental Empire absolves Israel of any real responsibility for the criminal settlement project, it was just a concatenation of events, as his piece on the accidental Nakba said that Israel didn’t realy expel the Palestinians, sh*t happens. P.S. They weren’t allowed to come back, 750,000 of them, after the dust had settled; as if there was not policy in that. I can’t wait for him to get to slavery. And if you consider his religious dictum, you’ll notice that he’s abdicating all judgment to some guy with a gray beard 3000 years ago.
Let’s be clear, Gorenberg is the sh*t right now. He gets hired by a lot of American publications to explain Israel, but he's got a very strong point of view. During the Q-and-A (which was only via 3-by-5 cards for crowd control purposes) he gave a lecture against the questions saying they were ideological statements or leading questions, they weren’t designed to elicit information from the expert panel. I don’t know where this guy got his ideas about how people ought to conduct themselves at a public event on a controversial subject. He said he woldn’t accept questions like this in his journalistic seminar. So we were attending a seminar, by four Zionist Jews and a Christian Zionist? And the Palestinian-Americans and anti-Zionists in the audience have to defer to teacher?
Charney Bromberg was next. Just to stay on the shmegegge theme, I'd note that he was the only big guy on the panel. I like a big Jew. I like a big redheaded bearded squarejawed barrelchested Jew, which is Charney Bromberg. He's a giant.
And Charney Bromberg is in agony the way any conscious human being should be. Even Biden said the status quo is unsustainable; when I was in Israel/Palestine for a week recently I understood that it's in crisis, a country can’t sustain itself if half the population makes all the decisions for the other half. And Bromberg was the one guy on the panel who was on to this. He spoke with honesty and sadness. The Israelis have hermetically sealed themselves off from the occupation. Listen:
Most Israelis have no idea. They won't travel to East Jerusalem. They certainly won't go to the crossing point...What you have is a country that has become hermetically sealed from the issue and the problems. And if you believe that you can have peace without a peace agreement, then that's good, and you go with it, but this situation is not going away. It may well be that it will be there for decades and decades more, but in the process, something has happened that is a serious affront to the idea of a good Israel that I believed in when I first started this work some 35 years ago.
[Long pause.]
I'm very leery of the word apartheid. Bishop Tutu says it's apart-hate, as in hate. Israel was not created as a racist state. I do not believe Israel is a racist state. But cross the Green Line and you will see so many of the accoutrements that the South Africans placed to control their -- what they believed to be their hostile population. Roads for whites only. Roads controlled at every pass. Roads controlled by fences and guards.
After that, Bromberg told about his soul-crushing trip to Hebron. Bromberg had been introduced to the audience with a bio about his being a civil-rights activist in the 60s, and he was a marked man for the KKK. Well unlike so many other Zionists, Bromberg is trying to reconcile the ideals of his youth with what Israel has become. In Hebron, he saw the young settler girls attacking Palestinian women -- I saw videos of the same there-- and now he's bearing witness. Frankly, I don't know how anyone can believe in Zionism as a living ideology when you see that.
Then he criticized the journalists for not raising questions.
"There are pieces that come across in youtube and elsewhere that at least should be looked at." He referred to the killing of a young Palestinian at the fence the other day. I think he means Ahmad Deeb, killed demonstrating in Gaza. God bless Charney Bromberg for mentioning that.
Why was live ammunition used and why was live ammunition aimed at the chest and the head and not at the legs?
Well Charney that doesn’t really follow. It’s crazy. They fired at Ahmad Deeb’s legs. They killed him by hitting his femoral artery. That happened in Palestine, not in Kent State 40 years ago or in Mississippi 47 years ago. They fired on a demonstrator. And this unendable occupation is why many people are calling for a democracy in Israel/Palestine, one country of its citizens, and asking Jews like Charney and me to try and help imagine it so that the shmegegge Jews won't be afraid.
When Bromberg was finished a bunch of my friends stood up and gave him a standing o. But Bromberg was taken aback by the applause, and promptly distanced himself from any one-state folk. I saw him lumbering out later, a big redheaded Jew who knows that the spirit didn't just show up 3000 years ago, the spirit is alive in history.
Charney Bromberg has the courage to challenge his own lifelong beliefs. Not many people have that kind of courage.
How true (that: Not many people have that kind of courage.)
It doesn’t just apply to Zionists (a silly generalization as there are VERY wide range of perspectives, goals, observations among Zionists).
You can also undertake self-review, clarify, refine your views.
a silly generalization
probably why no one is making it.
Gorenberg’s reference to the 1948 Palestinian “exodus” reminds me of the history lesson given years ago at a Thanksgiving dinner in western Massachusetts: “There used to be Indians here, but they went away.”
What is that a summary of?
What article? What book?
it is in reference to phil’s post
There came a spectacular statement of this philosophy last night when he referred to the expulsion of the Palestinians in ’48– the Nakba– as the Palestinian “exodus.” It just came out.
Notatall,
Where in Western Mass do you live?
Do we know each other?
It’s interesting, how people delude themselves. What has changed here? The jews have a soverign state, recognized by all other sovereign states, yet the apologists for the state of Israel’s actions pretend Israel has no power? How much longer is the powerful state of Israel’s activities to be conjoined with Anne Frank?
As long as they believe their own bullshit.
Pingback: Tweets that mention Big brave Charney Bromberg says… it’s apartheid -- Topsy.com
Gorenburg deserves to be listened to.
You actually reveal that you laugh at the people that you are reporting about behind their backs?
You should erase this one Phil.
Find another way to write approvingly of Charlie Bromberg.
funny, i just logged on to tell phil he’s at his finest. this is an excellent post, just excellent.
thanks phil!
Yes, skillful ridicule. How noble.
however, it’s true. i love the personal antidote.
sharks are delegitimizing the dolphins, and he said the two neocons were shmegegges. That’s Yiddish for nobodies. They were both small men with complaining voices. I had that icky feeling I sometimes get that Zionism has called on the most crabbed part of Jewish character, the hunted powerless feeling.
it is informative but at the same time chatty, it just suits me that’s all.
anyway i was jusy looging on the tell him i loved it when i saw your comment there and i wondered whether i should post it independently or attach it to yours.
but while i have your attention i’m a little baffled by the ‘role’ you play here. you did this the other day w/phil’s choice of words. do you imagine you are some sort of mentoring character (to phil) or play some kind of moral or ethical overseer?
You actually reveal that you laugh at the people that you are reporting about behind their backs?
ahhh, why not? have you checked the intertubes lately? this is phil’s blog he can write whatever he wants. since when are people required to respect the subjects of their reports especially under the circumstances?
During the Q-and-A (which was only via 3-by-5 cards for crowd control purposes) he gave a lecture against the questions saying they were ideological statements or leading questions, they weren’t designed to elicit information from the expert panel. I don’t know where this guy got his ideas about how people ought to conduct themselves at a public event on a controversial subject. He said he woldn’t accept questions like this in his journalistic seminar.
maybe Gorenberg should have respected his audience and treated them like adults, not lowly clueless students. you could brush up on respect yourself you know. who are you coming to phil’s blog informing him what he should or should not erase. don’t play phil’s protector, we all know who you are protecting.
ps, i’m not clever at skillful ridicule. when i ridicule someone i do it in several boring lecturing paragraphs where i spill out my beans.
I like a big Jew. I like a big redheaded bearded squarejawed barrelchested Jew, which is Charney Bromberg. He’s a giant.
see? and i like the way phil writes and imagine others do to. if you don’t go elsewhere don’t feign mr manners while defending the unmannerly.
sorry, should read “anyway i was just logging on to tell him”
If Phil doesn’t come around to a more sensible position, Witty will be forced to tell Phil’s Mom and Dad how far their son has strayed from the gooey Jewish center.
And if Phil gets disowned, it’s not Witty’s fault, he’s just doing what his ethics require of him.
That’s why Witty is gently pointing out Phil’s mistakes, and giving Phil every possible chance to recant before he (Witty) is forced by his conscience to tell Phil’s family how Phil has betrayed Judaism.
I’ll stay away from the question unless asked, and then I’ll be considerate and generous to Phil as I was the last time I was asked.
Annie,
It depends on what your and Phil’s goal is. If his and/or your goal is to inform as many people as possible of the condition pf Palestinians and realities that form that condition, his audience will remain very limited if he undertakes ridicule as his mode.
He will speak to the converted, as he does largely alreadyl
And, the converted here believe that they are doing an effective job at addressing those that differ with Phil’s editorial slant and specific opinions and references. In fact, their zeal and willingness to offend rather than actually address content raised, hinders both Phil’s and their (stated or unstated) goals.
I agree, Annie. Witty reminds me of the kind of woman who puts a crocheted doily over her toilet paper, because everything has to look “nice”.
not a very apt analogy MRW. more like placing a doily over a turd imagining it will serve to erase the smell.
Also, I think it deserves some appreciation of Campus Media Watch that the diversity of opinions they invited was wide and conflicted with your characterization of their bias.
It makes you sound conformist to political correctness, rather than facilitator of actual discussion.
Campus Media Watch is a hideous organization, out to destroy professors and students who do not toe their line.
You want actual discussion? You want truth telling?
Then start with this:
Deconstructing the walls of Jericho by Ze’ev Herzog
Friday, October 29, 1999, Ha’aretz
link to mideastfacts.org
thanks for the link MRW..
if they had been inviting diversity of opinion they could have included an open forum Q&A session. i find it amusing your idea of diversity of opinion on israel/ palestine is four Zionist Jews and a Christian Zionist. i’m looking forward to attending a diverse i/p discussion w/4 anti zionist palestinians along w/one white christian anti zionist.
Witty — are you on the record with your support of Campus Media Watch?
“Also, I think it deserves some appreciation of Campus Media Watch that the diversity of opinions…”
Okay, funniest thread ever, hands down. My stomach ached all night, I laughed so hard at that!
The primary point about ridiculing those that think differently, by a prominent professional journalist, is that it is an indication that he does not take either his profession or his effort to educate Americans about Palestinian condition and experience, seriously.
Max Blumenthal we know from his work, consistent.
Max Blumenthal reports the truth.
How can you tell?
He puts a camera on Zionism. You do the rest for us, you criminal.
i could care less about how seriously he takes his work. i was watching morgan freeman on some late night program last night and the interviewer was grilling him about how seriously he takes rugby since that SA film. he doesn’t, he’s not really a fan. he wasn’t hired for the part because he is a fan, he had a job to do. if someone had a cure for cancer would you care how seriously he took his work. if the best heart surgeon could operate on failing heart would you nix him in favor of having your son operate on you because he takes your life seriously?
i do happen to think phil takes i/p seriously, he just doesn’t show it the way you want him to. the daily show is popular because jon stuart is good at his job, not because he covers the issues seriously but because he doesn’t. people watch him because they like his style and info, same reason most people follow phil. you however follow phil to play site overseer. you can appoint yourself as phil’s manager for all i care but we don’t have to recognize you as such. you’re lucky phil allows you to post here. what would you do w/your life if you didn’t hover over this site endlessly.
“if someone had a cure for cancer would you care how seriously he took his work. if the best heart surgeon could operate on failing heart would you nix him in favor of having your son operate on you because he takes your life seriously?”
If someone that had discovered a cure, but didn’t bother to learn the side effects of the cure, or potential dangers during other parts of the surgery, damn straight I’d object. That is what modern medicine demands, what peer-reviewed science and professionalism demand.
The Daily Show is advertised as comedy. Are you sure you want to make that parallel?
Again, the question to you is “do you want your work to be effective?” and the corollary, “do you want Phil’s work to be effective?” and “do you think Phil wants his work to be effective?”
If by effective, he means influencing the understanding and range of options of liberal American and Israeli Jews and liberal non-Jewish Americans, then he will limit his ridicule on contreversial content.
Richard, as I remember, when Phil went to Gaza, you responded in comments that it was self-evident he sold his soul, and maybe his ass, too, to the Palestinians. You basically said he was a journalistic prostitute, or possibly mentally unbalanced (that’s you Richard, always striving to be fair).
Anyway, after that, just saying he does not take his profession “seriously” is a real step up.
What raised your opinion of Phil so much? Anyway, I’m sure his family will be glad to hear it.
My criticism of Phil at going to Gaza was three-fold (in addition to irritating biased incidents):
1. That he did not indicate any serious inquiry into Hamas’ behavior, or any probing questions of them at the press conference that he attended.
2. That he went on a tour with the converted.
3. That he didn’t report his observations in any coherent extended form, including visuals and interviews. Only in snippets, each tied to some innuendo.
He was careful not to ridicule them, or laugh about them at that press conference. Certainly a smart thing to do, as there was danger in being in Gaza. But he felt that it was ok for him to do so and report about it here.
He has public gravitas from meeting real people, from reading widely (I assume), from probing deeply into his real questions. He gets invited to fly to Qatar, thats gravitas.
I find it confusing among activists, when political views born of sensitivities and compassion, are expressed insensitively and with selective compassion.
“with selective compassion”
Have mercy on us, Judge, we’re orphans!
Actually, Richard, my question was more in the nature of this: “You already said the stupidest thing you could possibly say, months ago. Why not shut up already?”
That was more the nature of my question.
And Richard, if you expect these louts, these Litvaks, these raskalnikovs (why not?) around here to understand the exquisite Jewish sensitivity what makes even the littlest slight like murder to us, forget it! They got no souls, like dumb beasts!
Not inquiring into the behavior of Hamas struck me as a journalistic negligence.
And, I’m still waiting for his more in-depth piece on his trip to Gaza, interviews, photos, film, coherence, meaning, candid conclusion.
“Not inquiring into the behavior of Hamas struck me as a journalistic negligence.”
More of that phony Zionist ingenuousness. I think Hamas is pretty much a known quantity by now, the good and the bad.
“And, I’m still waiting for his more in-depth piece on his trip to Gaza, interviews, photos, film, coherence, meaning, candid conclusion.”
Gosh, I sure hope he can produce it, and on your schedule, too. It’s pretty goddam self evident, ain’t it tho, that if he doesn’t, he might as well throw himself off a bridge, huh?
I’ll give you one thing Witty: I don’t think anybody is waiting for anything from you.
“And, I’m still waiting for his more in-depth piece on his trip to Gaza, interviews, photos, film, coherence, meaning, candid conclusion.”
And there is lies another example of Witty’s narcicism and presumption of his moral authority. While I keep reminding him that he is irrelevant and no one gives a crap what he thinks, Witty still will not wake up from hsi delusionary state that has convinved him we are all heere for his benefit.
And we’re waiting for your in-depth piece on your talk with your son regarding whether or not gentiles has animal souls. Perhaps when that Mexican soul moves on with his loud leaf-blowing machine?
RE: “Not inquiring into the behavior of Hamas struck me as a journalistic negligence.”
Yeah right, especially since the US MSM has constantly white-washed Hamas so that most Americans think Hamas is led by Eva Marie Saint.
He was careful not to ridicule them, or laugh about them at that press conference.
hmmmm ‘You actually reveal that you laugh at the people that you are reporting about behind their backs?’
damned if you do damned if you don’t.
i was there witty. i recall one day in the large conference room in the basement of our hotel there was a table off to the side with several members of the delegation along w/hamas reps hammering out a letter to obama. since this meeting went on for hrs many of us had an opportunity to sit in or contribute. lots of effort made by hamas was put into this very heartfelt letter. the mood in gaza wasn’t particularly ‘funny’ and the devastation everywhere wasn’t conducive to ridiculing anyone. most of hamas members are just people you know. they look and act and communicate like other people when you are around them.
one of the things we requested of hamas was to be able to meet several women from their organization. the next night as we entered the conference room there were over a 100 people there to talk to us one on one w/the entire room set us to facilitate. after a few introduction we all just started engaging eachother. there were a few translators but most of the people there spoke english and everyone i spoke with had several degrees. i loved that night. many amazing women w/huge hearts and warmth and and the evening proceeded there were so many voices all talking at once, layers and layers of expression just like women everywhere.
the situation is extremely dire and as much as you want to believe hamas was targeted they weren’t. all of gaza was targeted. 1/2 the population is children.
That he went on a tour with the converted.
you mean like medea benjamin..someone who woke up to i/p relatively recently? or me? i doubt i am anymore ‘converted’ than phil. get your head out of the sand.
expressed insensitively and with selective compassion.
because if nothing else neocons sensitive and compassionate! btw, my views are not born of sensitivities or compassion. they are born of a drive towards justice. there is an info war going on witty some of us are warriors. Campus Media Watch is a thuggish organization.
THUGS, they should be treated as such. those who speak for them do not deserve my respect, politeness , sensitivity or compassion.
But, annie, Witty is such a polite thug in virtual reality-I wouldn’t advise going to his actual door and asking for a donation for the wounded US war veterans of Iraq or Afghanistan. He basically thinks of them in the same way he thought of all southerners back in the days of the freedom riders. His main gripe is he hasn’t made tons of money exploiting the animal-souled natives as Jerry Springer has done.
Going on a tour with the converted? You mean like all those US Congressmen and women who have used tax-payer dollers to dine in Gaza?
I get that you defend Phil and his actions.
He is a journalist. His obligation is to question and to inform. Not, to draft a letter with Hamas officials.
So, I question whether his definition of his work is to inform or to propagate.
On the question of his presentation based on his trip. I firmly believe that the world NEEDS to hear eloquently and sensitively of the experience of Palestinians and of Gazans. It is in that spirit that I strongly suggest that he put that together. I’ve written to him privately to urge that, and state that publicly.
I urge that he do so while entirely disciplining himself to not undertake ANY polemic, but just inform.
It is a statement of trust in human nature, to inform, even less than embellishing realities.
I have to wade through abusive exagerations of my comments and positions, in order to retain my conviction on not choosing to adopt the “Israel right or wrong” position, which many of the dissenters here seem to prefer. Imagining that that is more “honest”.
If Phil is truly not a fanatic, then he as well will have to not have his communications created by the opposition, but actually keep and present the balance of his own convictions, honestly.
Right, Witty, I get that you have incessantly contacted your governmental reps and senators, urging them to visit Gaza. Just a little visit tacked onto their taxpayer-paid junkets to Israel.
I’ve written in the range of 15 letters to each of my representatives in the last two years, to urge that they learn of what is actually occurring in Gaza and the West Bank and do what they can to improve Palestinians lives.
I’ve posted a few of the letters here. Perhaps your memory is not up to snuff.
I believe you, Witty; after all, I’ve followed all your comments here for years.
“So, I question whether his definition of his work is to inform or to propagate”
Propagate? Wow, that low birth-rate thing really does bother you! I shouldn’t be so insensitive about it.
“I would say, I only know one objective source and he has not given a press conference in 3000 years.”
No, I thought G-d made His opinions on the viability and advisability of a Jewish State, considering His experience with the Jewish people (I think they were call Israelites in those days, which is now a brand of swag lamp we should be boycotting) quite clear. He was against it.
“His book the Accidental Empire absolves Israel of any real responsibility for the criminal settlement project, it was just a concatenation of events, as his piece on the accidental Nakba said that Israel didn’t realy expel the Palestinians, sh*t happens. ”
It’s a fallback position. You see this with the I/P conflict–you start out with people thinking it’s just evil Arabs vs. good Israeli Jews and then some unpleasant facts come out about the Israeli side and so the good little liberal then says it was some unfortunate sh*t that happened, but of course Arab terrorism is still evil. Evil is what the other side does.
It’s also a negotiating position. The more we learn about Israeli crimes, the stronger the moral case for the Palestinians becomes and the more they have the right to demand. So it’s necessary to downplay the bad intentions of the Israeli side.
Incidentally, RW has nearly half the posts in this thread as of my typing this, and most of them seem like his usual kneejerk trolling. Phil types a post and RW comes in and rather than agree with some parts and disagree with others, he just starts whining. It’s so easy to get sucked into replying to some of his really stupid remarks (I speak from much experience) and the thread has already started well on its way to becoming a seminar on the Deep Thoughts of Richard Witty.
I believe Witty mentioned that Silverstein’s blog put him on a limit of three posts per subject. Not silenced, just throttled a bit.
“the thread has already started well on its way to becoming a seminar on the Deep Thoughts of Richard Witty. ”
As most of them usually do.
“a seminar on the Deep Thoughts of Richard Witty”
If I skip coffee break I’ll have time for the whole thing, and the discussion afterwards.
It’s amazing that Phil who claims he didn’t care about Israel/Palestine until he was in his late 40′s is so critical of a true scholar Gorenberg. It’s hard to imagine someone who claims to care so deeply for the Palestinians didn’t give a crap about them one way or another for almost his entire life.
Jeffrey Goldberg said it perfectly when talking about Mearsheimer’s “righteous Jews: “The others, though, are part of a tiny minority of Jews who believe that the destruction of Israel will bring them the approval of non-Jews, which they crave.”
“The others, though, are part of a tiny minority of Jews who believe that the destruction of Israel will bring them the approval of non-Jews, which they crave.”
See the kind of crap you gotta put up with when you go into the armed-state business, Julian? Look at the poor Russians, thousands made their entire livings, let alone their political careers, saying bad shit about the Commies and Russia. If all Israel has to put up with is Jews who hope for its destruction so they can snag Gentile girls, they should consider themselves lucky. Or did you have a more detailed substantiation of that charge? Yeah, I didn’t think so.
Besides, aren’t you going to send the IDF after them? But that’s what happens in this musheggener world, you start out to be Jewish and Socialist, whoops, bite my tongue, those days are long gone, I meant Jewish and democratic State, and you end up the Jewish and Passive-Aggressive State. A unique national pathology for a unique and pathological nation.
“It’s hard to imagine someone who claims to care so deeply for the Palestinians didn’t give a crap about them one way or another for almost his entire life.”
I imagine it must be hard for someone who is impervious to facts or reason, to imagine that there are others who do change their position based on new information. That’s hwo we came to agree that the earth was indeed raound and not flat.
“Jeffrey Goldberg said it perfectly when talking about Mearsheimer’s “righteous Jews”
Jeffrey Goldberg, liek you, is a liar, who woudl rather invent an argument and invent false accusations, than engage in an honest debate, because like you, he realizes that the debate cannto be won on merit.
What I find amazing is how the Brown shirts like Julian, Rachel and Goldberg betray the victues of Judaism in the name of Zionism. They say that if you have 2 Jews in a room, you’ll get 3 opinions, and diversity of opinion is a quality we have all come to revere from Jewish people. Yet when it comes to Israel, such diversity cannot be tolerated and according the the Goldbegr’s of this world. any diververgence from the approved narrative is evidence of self loathing or mental illness.
It just goes to show that Zionism ios not only incompatible with human right and interaational law, but also with Judaism itself.
Yeah, well, that 2 Jews, 3 opinions gag–how often does it relate to who’s ox is being gored, and who has a dog in the fight?
shingo, diversity of opinion is a quality we have all come to revere from Jewish people. Yet when it comes to Israel, such diversity cannot be tolerated
your post reminded me of an excellent hareetz op ed (front page today) The Vaudeville routine that has taken over American Jewry a must read.
Here are some of the abiding principles spoken of late in the name of American Jewry:
Item: Judaism has a healthy tradition of argument and talmudic debate, and the Jewish community embraces a wide diversity of beliefs, but there are some ideas that are simply beyond the pale. Lots of them, in fact. Remember the old joke about two Jews and three opinions? Well, we’ve got a howler: six million American Jews and one (legitimate) opinion.
To me it’s amazing that any American living today has actually gotten beyond the MSM show put on by early Hasbara in the form of Paul Newman, Sal Mineo, and the WASPY princess. We pulled back the curtain, and found wheelchaired Charles Krauthammer playing with his relatively new spunky little Glen Beck hand puppet. Phil is not in Kansas anymore.
Watch out everybody, I was just at another thread, and Witty is rumbling about libel laws on the web. You may get indicted. Or detained.
Zionist-supporters, you see, have been traumatised by the thousands of years of anti-Semitic prosecution, which is why they always immediately threaten to sue or have you arrested. Awful how always being powerless and persecuted effects people!
Yeah, I read where the only thing that will protect you from a lawsuit is a google history of your regular attendance at hasbara web sites.
“Well unlike so many other Zionists, Bromberg is trying to reconcile the ideals of his youth with what Israel has become.”
Not a problem for Dick Witty. He concedes some crackers were never really pure bigots in the old South, and some Palestinians are actually human. Well, he does so in theory anyway. He’s read a little Bernays.
Phil Weiss betrays his assimilationist tendencies in his quote from Kafka and his preference for big Jews.
Kafka said that going to a Zionist meeting made him feel like a wooden clothes rack, “pushed into the middle of the room.”
The apparent quote re:Kafka was available on Google in “Kafka- The Decisive Years” by Reiner Stach. In a passage regarding the Eastern Jews who came as refugees to Prague at the beginning of WWI and the incomprehension of the Western Jews (Prague Jews) towards the poor Eastern Jews:
“But the best one is the little fellow, who has nothing but book knowledge, with a sharp voice incapable of amplification, one hand in his pocket, the other incessantly stabbing toward the audience and instantly proving what he intends to prove. Voice of a canary. Fills out labyrinthian grooves etched to the point of torment with the filigree of his discourse. Tossing of his head. I, as if made of wood, a clothes rack pushed into the middle of the room. And yet hope.”
Seems to me that the “I” is a bad translation of what Kafka wrote, since nowhere else in the passage is there a reference to Kafka himself and he is in fact referring to the little fellow and not to himself, that he looked like a clothes rack pushed into the middle of the room. And yet filled with hope.
Kafka had feeling for these little Jews from Eastern Europe.
Maybe indeed the little Jews from Galicia that Kafka encountered in Prague deserved a degree of respect that the little Jews represented on the panel that Phil Weiss observed did not deserve respect. But what we see here is the preference for big and not small, which are external virtues and not essential virtues. As Phil continues:
“Charney Bromberg was next. Just to stay on the shmegegge theme, I’d note that he was the only big guy on the panel. I like a big Jew. I like a big redheaded bearded squarejawed barrelchested Jew, which is Charney Bromberg. He’s a giant.”
Phil likes a big Jew. Not the Jews who looks like shmegegges, deserving the mockery from himself and Max. Not the tiny little Jews, but a big Jew. Since the external virtue of bigness is matched by the essential virtue of openness to the suffering of the Palestinians, it is inferred that it is the scrawny Jews who oppress the Palestinians and the big Jews who have no need to oppress.
But this inference is not the point. The point is that Phil and Max sit in back and mock the small Jews, but Phil likes a big Jew, who goes against the stereotype of the small Jew. This is the Phil who married out, who paid no attention to Zionism until a few years ago, who would have preferred never to have been awakened from his comfortable assimilated life and has now been bothered to pay attention to the Jews. And for this fact of dragging him away from his comfortable life he has the minor compensation of laughter at the little shmegegge’s and the wish that all Jews were giants.
That’s mildly interesting, I suppose, to anyone who cares that much about Phil’s psyche. His concern for the Palestinians probably stems from numerous motives. I’d type more, if I could only bring myself to care.
Gee, WJ, what does it mean when we have for our universal dinner a panel of 4 zionists jews and one christian zionist with an expertise in fishing? Kafka’s next novel? Or Proust’s?
Proust, that phony! Like it was really a madeleine in lime-flower soup which brought it all back. Not likely! Now a nice plate chicken soup with a matzoh ball? Sniff that, and it’ll all come back like it was yesterday.
“Phil Weiss betrays his assimilationist tendencies in his quote from Kafka and his preference for big Jews.”
C’mon, c’mon, what are you trying to do, kill me? I have never laughed so hard since I can remember.
But there’s a serious side to this that shouldn’t be ignored, so, I ask you Wondering Jew, are you going to report Phil for “assimilationist tendencies” and giganto-philo-semitism, or shall I?
BTW, wondering Jew, ixnay on the nay-nay over assimilation, okay? Mum’s the word, huh? Please keep in mind that several of your brother trolls are converts or the children of converts, and will be marrying non-Jews. Witty, famously, married a Bhuddist cardomon-seed counter.
Israel needs the right kind of people to prevail, and we don’t want to be too fussy about their Jewish boner-fides, you know?
If a guy’s got good aim and no scruples, he’s welcome in Israel, and it can be fixed with the Rabbis, easy.
“And for this fact of dragging him away from his comfortable life he has the minor compensation of laughter at the little shmegegge’s and the wish that all Jews were giants.”
You are gonna kill me, WJ, I’m choking now, and I spit bagel, cream-cheese and liuverwurst with sour-cream and coleslaw sandwich all over my keyboard.
But yes, you are right, you gotta take your minor compensations where you find ‘em.
Wait a sec — I don‘t think you keyboard is kosher any more.
Don’t worry, I keep a red-hot rock in the oven for just such an occasion. And I clean the bread crumbs out of the key before every Pesach. How’s that for Rememberance of Things Passover?
You know, for years people would say “Proustean” and I thought they were saying “Proustein”. I thought he was a Jewish writer.
Let’s hear it for Israel, the true, God-given home of the small Jew!
WJ- Great post as usual! Lost on the Phillistines, I am afraid. May be Donald will appreciate it!
How tall is Phil anyways? I think he is quite the handsome dude according to Google Images. Size does not matter, honest! Regardless, this post shows him to be a schlemiel, a shmendrik , and a shnook! Very much a fachadick or otherwise confused since he discovered the meshugass of Zion. He likes big, red headed Jews! A bissel faygela? Oy Vey!
Oh, I am just kibitzing! He is really a yiddisher kop but a bit of a yenta sometimes. Actually I like that in him. Nevertheless, Bubeleh, it is not nice to laugh behind peoples back, ! So feh! Tut! Tut!
Courtesy of the Internet. I don’t speak Yiddish.
P.S. Who is this fellow Brownshirt, Goldberg?
Phil is tall, thin, handsome, a little careless about formality in dress, smiles a lot.
Witty, I’m aware you own Phil Weiss, but would you sell him to me?
you go richard!!
Amira Hass
Israeli Jews and the building going in the occupied territories including East Jerusalem
“Behind the assembly lines are representatives of the entire people of Zion, hundreds of thousands of civilians and soldiers. Each of them has a personal interest in the continuation of the apparatus, even if that interest is wrapped in national or security cellophane. Netanyahu is not the only one responsible. He alone cannot stop the huge pilotless plane. There are a great many people in Israel who should be forced to erase the programs of the apparatus of domination and destruction, before it turns on its creators, its operators and those who profit from it. All of us.”
[complete article] link to haaretz.com
Pingback: AT COLUMBIA UNIVERSITY..ANOTHER CAMPUS WATCH MEETING....
“Netanyahu is not the only one responsible.”
There’s old Netanyahu, and then there are Netanyahu’s willing executioners.
You wrote that “In Hebron, he saw the young settler girls attacking Palestinian women — I saw videos of the same there– and now he’s bearing witness. Frankly, I don’t know how anyone can believe in Zionism as a living ideology when you see that.”
Let me get this straight: one instance of supposed Zionists (“young settler girls”) mistreating Palestinians invalidates Zionism as an ideology. Really? If a socialist mistreats someone, does that invalidate socialism? Of course not.
There have always been many streams of Zionism, often in conflict with one another. The misdeeds of a revisionist Zionist do not invalidate labor Zionism. They don’t even necessarily invalidate revisionist Zionism! One should distinguish between an ideology and the actions of some misguided, dimwitted, or malicious followers of that ideology.
Your inductive reasoning is fallacious. Your gratuitous slam of Zionism is unwarranted.
Michael, it’s not trivial; its related to the core of the ideology. it’s like when you saw soviet people waiting in line for bread; it spoke to some deep dysfunction in the system.
bear in mind, these settlers are encouraged to live there, and are never arrested.
if it was a one off i’d agree with yu. it isn’t.
Lame you are, Right! Whoops, sorry. Right you are, Lame!
And when one considers that these settler girls (who can’t be blamed for their parent’s illegal occupation) mistreating Palestinians is the only known recorded incident of Zionist misbehavior in the entire known universe, why, it makes one plotz with righteous anger! It’s practically a blood libel! Why it is, it is a blood libel!
Imagine using those innocent, apple-cheeked settler girls to bear the weight of Zionism’s non-existent sins!
Sorry, Phil, your reply had not appeared when I wrote mine.
“if it was a one off i’d agree with yu. “
You mean like all the other 40 year occupations-cum-illegal-settlement-expansion projects where the settler’s daughters don’t mistreat the local population?
Darn those excitable settler girls, everything was great til they came along!
Philip, even the very best ideas in history – democracy, civil liberties, justice, or whatever you prefer – can be and have been abused. Robespierre was committed to justice. I can imagine someone looking at the headless bodies at the foot of a guillotine and proclaiming, much as you did: “Frankly, I don’t know how anyone can believe in Justice when you see that.” And chopping off a head in the name of justice is not a “one-off” (forgive the pun). Excess seems to go with the territory of belief in a vision, whether that vision is Justice or Zionism or Palestinian Nationalism.
Zionism is not like the soviet system. It is not monolithic. The rampaging settlers do not present The Face of Zionism. They present a face – one of many, though admittedly an ugly face. Every noble ideal, every decent philosophy has an ugly face. That we see the ugliness, even that the ugliness is repeated over and over, does not, of itself, mean that the ugliness is the only face.
I am not a Zionist, so let me end by quoting a self-proclaimed Zionist who clearly opposes settler excesses. After participating in a Palestinian-Israeli demonstration at Sheikh Jarrah last month, Yossi Sarid wrote:
Even “Zionism” is starting to be considered an ideological deviance because many not so good people take its name in vain, and despicable acts are committed in its name. We are not part of them. . .
And I also do not plan to forgo Zionism. I define myself by myself and not by my enemies. . . The Israeli left is by and large Zionist, and those who have abandoned it are a mere handful. Anyone who is still struggling for an end to the occupation of the areas of Palestine and the Golan Heights, for a withdrawal to the borders of 1967 and for the division of Jerusalem into two capitals is my ally.
link to haaretz.co.il
You must be new here. The different strands of Zionism are old news, and the particular type of Zionist who concentrates on its misdeeds after 1967 is old news. Some Zionists defend any and every crime committed in the name of Zionism, some defend some crimes and deny others, and then there are some who defend none.
For me and for some others around here, the type of Zionism that is completely innocent would be cultural Zionism—cultural Zionists include people like Judah Magnes, who did not wish to establish a Jewish state. Those who wished to establish a Jewish state on land predominantly owned by Arabs were at best self-deluded and at worst determined to violate Arab rights to achieve this. There are also some political Zionists who believe that a Jewish state is justified and yet don’t deny any of the crimes committed in its name–in particular, they don’t draw the line at 1967 and pretend everything was fine before then.
A more useful and humane method of defining the types of Zionists, are in the intentions for the future.
There is no precedent of accepting political or cultural democracy in the region, so to have any litmus test one way or another on “denial of crimes” is at least partially an exercise in vanity and selective judgement.
But, intentions towards the human beings that actually live there now, and the application of justice, is the measure of democratic intent.
Live and let live, or condemnation, or expulsion and/or violently.
That’s it Witty,
Always trying to pretend that the past never happened or don’t matter. Alays pretending like Israel was always there, that there are no refugees and that the Palestinians in the occupied territories owe their eternal gratitude to the Israelis.
If intentions towards the human beings that actually live there now, and the application of justice, is the measure of democratic intent, then Israel is no democracy.
Pingback: Mandela reunites with World Cup trophy | World Cup 2010