Teaneck harassment case ends with apology & forgiveness & Ilan Pappe

Yesterday we reported that a leader in the U.S. arm of the settler movement was going to trial in Teaneck today for allegedly tailgating/harassing another New Jersey man who sported pro-Palestinian bumper stickers on his car. Well Bernie Thau, the settler-supporter, and Rich Siegel, the complainant, met in the parking lot outside the courthouse today. Siegel tells the story.
 
Bernie apologized to me rather profusely.  He agreed to write my wife and me a note of apology and share it with the board of the Hevron Fund.  He agreed to read a book- yet unnamed- that I am going to give him, and give me his reaction afterwards.  (I will send him "The Ethnic Cleansing of Palestine" by Ilan Pappe.)  And he offered-- I did not ask-- to make a donation to Deir Yassin Remembered [Siegel sits on the advisory board]. That all satisfied me, so I agreed to ask that the charge be dropped.  (I can't drop the charge myself; after probable cause is found it becomes the state's charge.  I can only make the request.)  
 
The two men went into the courthouse and learned that through a misunderstanding owing to the religious investment of both men in the issue, as Jews,Thau had been charged with "bias intimidation" and the case referred to Bergen County court.
 
At this point my goal was to get Bernie untangled.  I went to Hackensack with him, and we were sent around to three different offices and accomplished nothing.  I've subsequently called the police sergeant whose garbage pail should have been the destination of the unsigned charge.  And Bernie and I chatted about this and that, coming to realize that we're both human beings and decent guys. 

I tell you what, I think Bernie and I both learned a lesson today, and although I can't speak definitively for him, I really think it was the same lesson.

 I'm so used to being angry about Israel, angry at my own background-- angry at being lied to and being put in harm's way with the lies, and in particular being especially angry at the people Bernie hangs out with- the Hevron Fund and the rest of the Gush Emunim settler movement. And obviously from Bernie's actions, he's pretty used to being angry at what he probably perceives are anti-Semites.   But we saw each other as human beings today.  I saw him as a guy who acted impulsively and regrets it, who was genuinely apologetic and willing to do some very out-of-character things to make it up to me.  He saw me as a guy who was willing to back off from revenge and accept an apology, basically willing to forgive-  him personally, definitely not the movement he represents.  I just wonder if, after he reads the Ilan Pappe book he's committed to reading, will he also be able to see the Palestinians as human beings.  

Later Bernie called me to tell me that the bias intimidation mess had been resolved, and he reminded me that he had agreed to read a book, asked me the title, because he wanted to buy it.  I told him I'd already ordered it and was going to send it to him.  So, could it be the world is changing and starting here?  (I can dream, can't I?)
 
By the way- about the "put in harm's way" thing I wrote above. There's a really lovely statue in front of the library here in Teaneck, right next to the town hall where the municipal court is located, of a young woman bending over flowers.  It's dedicated to a young woman who, like me, went to Israel to be there for a while, to live and work, whatever she did.  I also went to Israel to live and work, as a young man, with a head full of Zionist myths I'd been taught all my life.  I was there for awhile, and came back home, still a Zionist. She came back in a box.  She got on the wrong bus. That could have been me.  I often wonder about her- what she thought, how much she knew, how much she didn't know, if she had any idea, in the final moments of her life, about why someone wanted to kill her.  
 
How many of us have gone to an early grave supporting Zionism without understanding a damn thing about it?!
 
While the bias charge has been dropped, the harassment case that Siegel pushed is still on the books.
 

There will be another court date. If I don't show up, the charge will be dropped. I think I will write a letter to the prosecutor in advance of the court date to make sure that happens, copied to Bernie so he can carry a copy with him.

Posted in Israel/Palestine

{ 107 comments... read them below or add one }

  1. Chaos4700 says:

    Wasn’t Witty condemning Siegel yesterday and saying this was all his fault because he wouldn’t just accept an apology for it?

  2. syvanen says:

    I notice he followed my suggestion that Thau should be asked to read Pappe’s book as part of the settlement. And they will discuss it afterwords. Now this could be positive. If only we could get Witty to do the same.

    • Donald says:

      Oh, he might, if you promise to “study” with him. If you do so, I would advice wearing a football helmut, for all the brick walls you will find yourself slamming into.

      Back to the post–a great story. One hopes it will go further, but sometimes people who have noxious political opinions are quite decent in their ordinary face-to-face dealings with others. Thau might be like that–someone with fanatical political opinions who got carried away when he saw a bumper sticker and suddenly realized on a personal level what a jerk he was being. (And for that matter, it could easily happen in reverse, if someone on our side is too hotheaded.)

  3. rachel says:

    It is a great story. You guys probably have a lot more in common than you think. I will be curious to know about Bernie’s reaction to the book. Keep us posted. So much passion about the I/P conflict. We need to cool it cause it is scary how people get carried away. It would not come to my mind to tailgate somebody because of a bumper sticker no matter how I feel about an issue.

    • Chaos4700 says:

      We need to cool it cause it is scary how people get carried away.

      Images of babies burned to death by incendiary weapons tends to make people upset, yes. I dare say that is not unreasonable.

      • Avi says:

        Chaos,

        Unlike the angry Palestinian masses the average American media consumer sees on TV, Israelis sit comfortably in the safety of an air conditioned cockpit, 3000 feet above the ground and with a click of a cute little button, drop a 1000 or 2000 bomb to level an entire housing complex.

        By attempting to co-opt Shmuel, with flattery and sweet talk, coupled with her post above, she is essentially trying to regain her credibility so that she can use the old divide-and-conquer routine and turn this website into a pigsty with her propaganda.

        Unfortunately for her, she’s still a racist who just several days ago, upon seeing post-Nakba photos of Palestinians in refugee camps, said that it was normal for Palestinians to live in tents, for that is how they lived in the 50s – the old nomadic tribes hasbara nonsense.

        • “she’s still a racist who just several days ago, upon seeing post-Nakba photos of Palestinians in refugee camps, said that it was normal for Palestinians to live in tents,”
          Not to mention the “Palestinian Think Tank is an oxymoron” she “authored” in her first days here. And I’m not close to forget that I’ve earned a ” kalb and a sharmoota” for merely writing something she disagreed with. But who knows? Maybe she’s a much better person than the one she displays here. Giving her the benefice of the doubt is the reasonable sensible approach.

        • Shmuel says:

          By attempting to co-opt Shmuel, with flattery and sweet talk

          Don’t worry, Avi. I’ll be strong ;-)

        • Shafiq says:

          By attempting to co-opt Shmuel, with flattery and sweet talk, coupled with her post above, she is essentially trying to regain her credibility so that she can use the old divide-and-conquer routine and turn this website into a pigsty with her propaganda.

          I have to admit, I fell for it – up until I read your post.

          I really do wonder whether Bernie Thau does change his views of the conflict. If he does, it means no-one truly makes an irreversible journey to the dark side.

        • Mooser says:

          Once you have killed, or condoned killing, the journey is irreversible. But of course, not for Jews. After all, it’s a “we” culture, so there’s always somebody else to blame.

        • Shmuel says:

          Mooser,

          You might want to check out my explanations on that other thread, before twisting my words (again). You might also want to give me a little more credit than that. Of course, if you’ve got your heart set on that conclusion-jumping olympic medal, far be it from me to stand in your way.

  4. lyn117 says:

    You should send him http://www.amazon.com/Mornings-Jenin-Novel-Susan-Abulhawa/dp/1608190463 by Susan Abulhawa. It’s the same story, but more personal.

    • Avi says:

      That’s a great idea. He might actually learn to see Palestinians as human beings through that reading. Who knows.

      A few months ago, as I and a friend of mine attended a demonstration, a few of Israel’s supporters gathered up across the street waving signs, gesturing and shouting profanities, my friend looked at me and started crying. She said, “Two years ago, that was me on that side of the street”, (among the Zionist crowd).

  5. robin says:

    Sounds like a good result from a bad situation. But I wonder if Thau would have reacted differently had the plaintiff not been a Jew. Would he have been more inclined to think of a non-Jew with similar bumper stickers as an anti-semite?

    • syvanen says:

      Almost certainly. There is a dialogue going on today between Jews. It is real and it is important. The zionist cause is permeated with paranoia, it is hard to imagine them listening to, for example, myself.

  6. Thanks for acknowledging that non-radical Jews are human beings.

    • sherbrsi says:

      When are you going to acknowledge the human rights of Palestinians as human beings, Witty?

      • I’ve done it a thousand times, but not in your angry language. I take it you don’t want to learn the same lesson of the distortion of anger on character and political analysis as well.

        • sherbrsi says:

          I’ve done it a thousand times, but not in your angry language.

          Really? So Gazans have the same human rights as Israelis?

        • Shafiq says:

          You say you acknowledge Palestinian human rights, but when we actually come to applying it, it seems your concern for Palestinian human rights disappear – for example, with regards to the RoR, the right not to be under collective punishment, the right to resist occupation etc.

        • The assertion of the “right to resist occupation” is a rhetorical right, not a legal one (certainly not to adopt mass murder as chosen means).

          The right of return proposal needs clarification. I don’t understand why remain so vague about what it would entail in your mind.

          The “right to not be under collective punishment” is also a rhetorical term, not a clear legal one, as if you looked at really any assertive claim, there would be an element of collective punishment to it.

          Certainly, the assertion that the Jewish people don’t have a right to self-govern is a form of collective punishment, as is the assertion that Palestinians don’t have a right to self-govern.

        • Aref says:

          Mr. Witty why is it that you always must twist facts and try to blur the issues? International law unequivocally states that occupied peoples have the right to resists occupation including the use of arms. This is not my opinion and it’s not the personal opinion of anyone here it is an agreed right granted by international law. Yes civilians must be protected and cannot be targets neither by those who resist occupation nor by the occupying power–’collateral damage’ is a sanitization of murder by the occupying forces to absolve it from wrong doing.
          Would you please heed the example of Mr. Thau and be willing to open your mind –even a crack–to some different view point without always resorting to your usual obfuscation?

        • Where does international law say that?

          Please show me, including the legal context.

        • Please note that international law also affords a state to defend itself against assaults on its civilians.

          I hope that you agree.

        • eljay says:

          >> Aref: International law unequivocally states that occupied peoples have the right to resists occupation including the use of arms.
          >> RW: Where does international law say that? Please show me, including the legal context.
          >> RW: Please note that international law also affords a state to defend itself against assaults on its civilians.

          1. The destruction and devastation of occupation – which may include assaults on occupied civilians – is peachy. There may or may not be legal justification for it, so keep on truckin’!
          2. Occupation leads to resistance, which may include assaults on civilians of the occupying nation. Apparently there is no legal justification for it. Bad resistance!
          3. Resistance leads to defence “against assaults on [the occupier's] civilians. This is all nice and legal.

          So, Israel gets to occupy, steal and kill and then, when resistance results in the death of Israelis, Israel gets to kill again. What a lovely scam.

        • Aref says:

          This right has been affirmed by UN bodies, including the UN Security Council, the UN General Assembly, the UN Commission on Human Rights, the International Law Commission and the International Court of Justice.

          See UN General Assembly Resolutions 37/43, 1514, 3070, 3103, 3246, 3328, 3382, 3421, 3481, 31/91, 32/42 and 32/154
          See Article 1(4) of Protocol 1 of the Geneva Conventions.
          See UN Charter

        • Shmuel says:

          Aref,

          How dare you cite such biased, anti-Semitic sources. Next thing you’ll be citing spurious hate organisations like Amnesty or MSF.

        • Aref says:

          Forgive Shmuel. I really am sorry I did not realize that those sources which when convenient to legitimize Israeli actions are cited but when they point to the crimes of Israel they become anti-semitic. I should be careful with those Cameleon organizations shouldn’t I :)

        • Aref says:

          that should be forgive me Shmuel :)

        • Colin Murray says:

          @ Richard Witty May 27, 2010 at 6:58 am

          I agree that states have a right to defend civilian non-combatants. However, armed adult Israeli colonists, even those ostensibly civilian, are not non-combatants. They are an armed militia using their weapons to defend their red-handed plunder. Their children are in a pitiable position. It is not their fault that their parents’ twisted sense of self-entitlement led to their being brought along on armed robberies and home invasions.

        • Aref says:

          ” 2.Occupation leads to resistance, which may include assaults on civilians of the occupying nation. Apparently there is no legal justification for it. Bad resistance! ”

          Resistance to occupation is legal and legitimate. Attacks on civilians by resistance movements or by occupying powers is neither. That includes collective punishment etc…

          States do have the right to defend their citizens. However, states do not have the right to transfer their citizens into occupied territories and they do not have the right to annex such territory. The Fourth Geneva Convention clearly spells out the obligations of the occupying country with respect to the occupied population and territory.

        • Aref says:

          Population of occupying powers transferred to occupied territories may loose their civilian status because they become illegal occupiers particularly when they are armed and engage in aggressive acts of intimidation and aggression regardless of whether they wear the uniforms of the occupying army or not.

        • Shafiq says:

          The right to resist occupation is I’m pretty sure, a legal one. Never did I mention mass murder and assuming I meant that says more about you than it does me.

          I clarified what I meant by RoR in the other thread – you chose to ignore it so Ill repeat it here. Those Palestinians who lived in what is now Israel in 1948 must be allowed to return to Israel. Those Palestinians who lived in the occupied territories, must be allowed to return there.

          The right not to live under collective punishment, (i.e. the illegality of collective punishment) is again a legal right under international law. With regards to the siege, denying full and proper access to food (human right), denying building materials needed to build shelter (human right), denying access to education (human right)….etc. etc. And with regards to the West Bank – one word – Checkpoints (No one shall be subjected to torture or to cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment.)

          And my favourites – Article 9 of the Universal Declaration – “No one shall be subjected to arbitrary arrest, detention or exile.”

          Article 13.2 – “Everyone has the right to leave any country, including his own, and to return to his country.”

          Never have I asserted that Jews don’t have the right to self-govern. What I have asserted is that Jews don’t have the right to self-govern AND disenfranchise non-Jews, which is exactly what modern-day Zionism (in the form of Israel) is.

          The number of human rights Israel has abused are too numerous to mention. All while you have attempted to justify these abuses. Yet you acknowledge Palestinian Human Rights?

        • eljay says:

          >> Resistance to occupation is legal and legitimate. Attacks on civilians by resistance movements or by occupying powers is neither. That includes collective punishment etc…
          >> States do have the right to defend their citizens. … The Fourth Geneva Convention clearly spells out the obligations of the occupying country with respect to the occupied population and territory.

          Toe-MAY-toe, toe-MAH-toe. You say occupation, I say “temporary administration over a region until sovereignty is established”. ;-)

        • “See UN General Assembly Resolutions 37/43, 1514, 3070, 3103, 3246, 3328, 3382, 3421, 3481, 31/91, 32/42 and 32/154″

          Are those ratified resolutions? Do you have links or complete text available?

          See UN Charter

          What specifically are you referring to?

          I didn’t see any reference in the items that you sited that support the “right to resist occupation”.

          Can you be more specific please?

        • Shmuel says:

          You say occupation, I say “temporary administration over a region until sovereignty is established”

          The term du jour is actually “contested territory”, I believe, as “administrated” implies that Israel somehow still controls the fully free and independent Palestinian areas (Area A and Gaza) it has withdrawn from. Didn’t you get the memo?

        • “I clarified what I meant by RoR in the other thread – you chose to ignore it so Ill repeat it here. Those Palestinians who lived in what is now Israel in 1948 must be allowed to return to Israel. Those Palestinians who lived in the occupied territories, must be allowed to return there.”

          Thank for doing so. Is that definition consented to by the predominance of dissent. Is the term used consistently?

          “Never have I asserted that Jews don’t have the right to self-govern. What I have asserted is that Jews don’t have the right to self-govern AND disenfranchise non-Jews, which is exactly what modern-day Zionism (in the form of Israel) is.”

          Zionism is the right to Jewish self-governance. So, in that regard you are a supporter of Zionism, as am I.

          The next question is of Israeli behavior, which if you bother to actually read, we probably also largely agree requires reform.

          I don’t know your nationality, but if you are Israeli or Palestinian and have any direct participation in the behavior of the parties involved, I would request that you assert your mutual acceptance prominently, so it cannot be confused with more opportunistic or malevolent intentions.

        • Shmuel says:

          Sorry, “false friend” translation from Italian. Should read “disputed territories”

        • “You say occupation, I say “temporary administration over a region until sovereignty is established”

          The term du jour is actually “contested territory”, I believe, as “administrated” implies that Israel somehow still controls the fully free and independent Palestinian areas (Area A and Gaza) it has withdrawn from. Didn’t you get the memo?”

          The status is ambiguous, changing all the time, resulting from the actions of multiple parties, including solidarity.

          The need is for clarification, so that rights can be clearly and confidently asserted, rather than only rhetorically.

          To deter the formation of an agreement is to delay that process. Israel does it and very very sadly, solidarity does it.

          That solidarity does things like inter-mingle single-state advocacy with BDS, confuse and deter the formation of an agreement. Even progressive Philip Weiss, flirting with the single-state concept in solidarity, DELAYS the clarification of rights and responsibilities of Palestinians in a state.

          There is a time for every purpose under heaven.

        • Aref says:

          The word de l’an for Witty is “ambiguous”. It is amazing that the whole world including the US legally refers to and talks about “occupied territories” yet Mr. Witty still finds it ambiguous. Obfuscation anyone? or is it simply ideological closed mindedness?

        • eljay says:

          >> Israel does it and very very sadly, solidarity does it.

          Interesting: It’s only “very very sad” when “solidarity” delays the implementation of a free Palestine, but not when Israel – an occupying and disruptive power (both politically and economically) – delays it.

        • sherbrsi says:

          Obfuscation anyone? or is it simply ideological closed mindedness?

          Both. It is Witty’s go to term for condemning anything he doesn’t want to address, ideologically and argumentatively.

          Some other “ambiguous” topics, much too complicated for Witty’s feeble mind, include BDS, RoR and Palestinian solidarity.

        • Sumud says:

          “Thank for doing so. Is that definition consented to by the predominance of dissent. Is the term used consistently?”

          Word Salad Alert!

        • eljay says:

          >> The status is ambiguous, changing all the time, resulting from the actions of multiple parties, including solidarity. The need is for clarification, so that rights can be clearly and confidently asserted, rather than only rhetorically. To deter the formation of an agreement is to delay that process. Israel does it and very very sadly, solidarity does it.

          I will pose again to RW the specific question I posed to him here…
          link to mondoweiss.net
          …and to which I had hoped to get a specific reply:
          What concrete measures – what sincere, equitable, thoughtful, productive, respectful measures – should Israel undertake to ensure that a Palestinian state, one with parallel rights and responsibilities, comes into existence?

        • Sumud says:

          “The status is ambiguous…”
          “The need is for clarification…”
          “To deter the formation of an agreement…”
          “That solidarity does things like inter-mingle…”

          What a dreadful mess you’re making Richard.

          We get it: “solidarity”, though we advocate for quite conventional ends, like the application of international law – is getting in the way of your jew-only state.

        • Sumud says:

          “…and to which I had hoped to get a specific reply:”

          Good luck eljay. I queried RW on his positive response to your four good suggestions here:

          link to mondoweiss.net

          In short: OK we agree on what needs to happen – Israel resists action on each of the 4 points – so now what? I didn’t receive a response either.

          So far his single known proposal (to my knowledge) is green yarn on the green line.

        • Mooser says:

          “There is a time for every purpose under heaven.”

          I am about to find out if a person can vomit and laugh hysterically at the same time.

          All right, it can be done, but it’s messy.

        • eljay says:

          >> link to maannews.net
          —————————————
          President Mahmud Abbas told reporters in Malaysia that no second phase of proximity talks would be initiated until mediators had successfully set down borders for a Palestinian state. …

          Abbas said Thursday that the current proximity talks focused on borders and security, key elements and confidence measures set up as first points of discussion by Palestinian and Israeli negotiations officials respectively.

          “It is the aim of negotiations to lead to the establishment of an independent Palestinian state with Jerusalem as its capital,” Abbas said, noting that he and mediators hoped the two major first-step issues would be resolved by the four-month deadline set by the Arab League.

          If a first phase is successful, “then we can go to direct talks,” he said.
          —————————————

          Well, lookit that! The Palestinians are attempting to clarify the ambiguity! Will Israel do its part to enable the creation of a sovereign Palestinian state or will it (sadly?) “delay the implementation of a free Palestine”? Stay tuned…

        • Aref,
          Again, I don’t see from your references that there is a clear “right to resist occupation”, nor “right to return” (three generations later), nor “prohibition against collective punishment”.

          Can you please specify where those otherwise rhetorical rights are derived and clarified?

          Without the specifics, its just an assertion, not even a legal opinion.

        • Sumud says:

          What’s the sudden interest in international law Richard? You revealed your crypto-nazi self to us a day ago, here:

          link to mondoweiss.net

          Since international law is a device with which you wish to comply when it suits, and ignore when it doesn’t, what’s the point?

        • Shmuel says:

          Since international law is a device with which you wish to comply when it suits, and ignore when it doesn’t, what’s the point?

          The point, Sumud, (as I’m sure you understood), is to distract and obfuscate, while maintaining his (self-)image as a reasonable, law-abiding citizen of the world. One of them Israeli knobel-laureates should look into harnessing Witty’s repressed cognitive dissonance as an unlimited source of (relatively) clean energy.

        • Sumud says:

          Shmuel ~ Yes, RW = white noise, and a huge dose of narcissism. He writes his own blogs – no traffic, so he has to come and defecate all over another.

          It would be nice to see his energy put to something constructive.

        • Cliff says:

          Dick Witty, since when do you care about international law? You have – in typical fascist fashion – characterized the mountains of resolutions against that shitty racist apartheid State as ‘political correctness’.

          You are shameless liar.

  7. Well, yes, all very nice, but in the end of the day Bernie is a supporter of the group that relentlessly encroaches on another people’s private property, uproots their trees, beats their shepherds and stones their children. No amount of politeness, apologies and crocodile tears will change that. A racist is a racist even if he’s rational enough not to want to pay a fine.

  8. richpiano says:

    It’s been interesting reading people’s reactions to the stories- both of them. I’ll just add a disturbing addendum. I received lengthy e mail this morning from Cracker Basher (crackerbasher@gmail.com) subject line “Hey Rich you slimebucket nazi piece of shit”, opening “Rich, We just wanted to congratulate all you little Nazis and subliterate crackers for doing so much for the world”- and it goes downhill from there, with sexual references and nonsense about circumcision. 5th paragraph opens with “Speaking of circumcision, we will be paying you a little visit next month, to offer you your very own circumcision.” Next paragraph opens with “Until then you can Sieg Heil your way around the trailer park…” So I’m going back to the police station yet again this morning.

    • eljay says:

      >> “Hey Rich you slimebucket nazi piece of shit” … “Speaking of circumcision, we will be paying you a little visit next month, to offer you your very own circumcision.” … “Until then you can Sieg Heil your way around the trailer park…”

      From your story and the peaceful resolution you reached with Mr. Thau, I would never have guessed that you’re a circumcision-seekin’ Nazi who marches around a trailer park. Go figure. ;-)

      I hope the cops treat this matter very seriously and ensure your safety.

  9. richpiano says:

    PS- if I didn’t make it clear- I’m Siegel.

  10. Aref says:

    Thank you Mr. Siegel for your generosity. Also thanks to Mr. Thau for his willingness to admit wrong doing and to extend an apology. I only hope that this incident will lead to Mr. Thau coming to the realization that Palestinians are human beings and that “their beef” is not with the Jews but with Zionism, a nationalist settler colonialist movement which stole the land from its indigenous people and inhabitants to create an exclusivist ethnocentric, therefore racist, state very much like Apartheid and other settler colonialist entities. I can hope. Can’t I?

  11. eljay says:

    A class act on the part of both men. Nicely done. :-)

  12. Mooser says:

    Thau isn’t worried. Remember, it’s a “we” culture. he’ll be just as satisfied if other Zionists take revenge for him.
    We are talking admirers of the Stern Gang here.

  13. richpiano says:

    To respond to what Aref wrote: I have a hobby that I engage in way too often- let’s call it an addiction- I debate with Zionists. I had a letter published in my union paper in April (local 802 NY musicians) asking my union brothers/sisters to respect BDS and turn down any offers to work in Israel. (Many 802 members do work in Israel- the Red Sea jazz festival, various classical concerts, etc.) Another member organized a letter-writing campaign urging members to write in, not to oppose my point of view as you might expect, but to disallow any future mention of Israel in our union paper. (Our paper, like all union papers, is all about politics, so this would be a very unusual decision.) One member he to wrote to betrayed him and contacted me. I contacted the union and the exposed the “plot”, so they know what’s going on, and are not printing the letters they receive. Then, just for sport, I contacted this fellow, a cellist named Aaron Minsky, and started a conversation. He has a lot of material on line, has written a book about Judaism/Zionism, and prides himself on a commitment to reason (google him). So I thought he might be different from other Zionists I’ve debated. A lot of background to get to this point: There is simply no convincing these people that the world hates the Jew, and that specifically “The Arabs” were allies of Hitler (proven by the unfortunate actions of the Mufti), that “The Arabs” wanted genocide of the Jews in WW ll, and when they didn’t get it, they tried it on their own in 1948, and thus the passion about the necessity of Israel. I’ve heard this before, but now I’m getting it from a guy who prides himself as having a commitment to “reason”. When the cult-mentality is that deep, as it is with so many Jews everywhere, reasoning that the Arab objection is to Zionism, not to Jews or Judaism, just does not have an impact, I’m afraid.

    • richpiano says:

      OOPS- should have proof-read that better. What I meant to say is this:
      There is simply no convincing these people WHO ARE SO FIRM IN THEIR BELIEF THAT the world hates the Jew, and that specifically “The Arabs” were allies of Hitler (proven by the unfortunate actions of the Mufti), that “The Arabs” wanted genocide of the Jews in WW ll, and when they didn’t get it, they tried it on their own in 1948, and thus the passion about the necessity of Israel. I’ve heard this before, but now I’m getting it from a guy who prides himself as having a commitment to “reason”. When the cult-mentality is that deep, as it is with so many Jews everywhere, reasoning that the Arab objection is to Zionism, not to Jews or Judaism, just does not have an impact, I’m afraid.

      • rachel says:

        It works both ways too, you know. The anti-zionists have also one dimensional view of Israel.

      • “There is simply no convincing these people WHO ARE SO FIRM IN THEIR BELIEF THAT the world hates the Jew,”

        Rich
        The whole thing sounds so familiar. Yesterday a pro-Israel but who also “cares about the Palestinians” (whatever that means) dropped this comment on my blog, asking for some help on how to deal with “Jewish paranoia” and how can the Palestinians “alleviate the fears of the Jews”, no less!:

        “Just interacted with a Jewish American who was convinced that the Palestinians were Takfiri commited to wiping out the Jews. He thought the Palestinians would chase the Jews even outside of Israel until all the Jews were dead.
        He seemed to think that 120 million people around the world wanted to kill all the Jews and take the threat very seriously.
        He said, there are only 13 million of us left.
        TGIA, he really meant every word. He wasn’t making it up. There are many like him. This person wasn’t stupid. He was a smart educated, sophisticated GI.
        Granted you can argue he isn’t an Israeli and doesn’t have on the ground experience with Palestinians, but still.
        Where does this deep fear and paranoia come from? How can Palestinians and Arabs alleviate it? Unless this fear is dealt with, there can be no success or justice for the Palestinians. These deep fears are no aberration. They are deeply felt.”

        What we’re obviously dealing with here is psychiatry material..Someone must do something, quick, to fix them before it’s too late. I doubt the Palestinians could, or even should, on top of all the misery they’re subjected to, have to address the psychological pathologies of this group of people.

        • BTW, Rich…Thank you very much for the beautiful, moving song “In Palestine”. I made it a post..

        • As far as the world hating the Jews, I will let that point dangle. There are certainly large portions of the world’s populations who hate the Jews, but Jew hatred in America is certainly at a low point and that is where the largest nonIsraeli Jewish population lives.

          As far as the Palestinians hating the Jews or enough Palestinians hating the Jews sufficiently to attempt to throw them out of I/P if they get the chance, this is not paranoia, this is a well founded fear. Even an anti Zionist like Robert Fisk in his article “State of Denial” inferred that this fear is well founded.

        • Chaos4700 says:

          The fear is only well founded, WJ, because that is EXACTLY what Zionist immigrants did TO THE PALESTINIANS.

          Payback’s a bitch, isn’t it?

        • potsherd says:

          When a thief worries that the rightful owner of his stolen goods will return and take back his possessions, using force to do it, this is a well-founded fear. The problem is, that the thief is not justified in possessing the stolen goods and the victim is justified in trying to get them back.

        • rachel says:

          potsherd, the violent,

          May your thoughts be cursed by Hashem like you cursed my eggplants. May your mind be blighted and suffer untold agonies.

        • potsherd
          Your comment reminded mew of an article by Tom Segev relating the aftermath of the ethnic cleansing operations in 1948. Some of the expelled families tried to come back and recover something from what they could not carry with them, valuables, goods they left behind. They were arrested by the new occupiers, thieves they said, and were delivered to the police who put them in jail..The article was published in Haaretz. I have it in my archives but can’t bother now.

        • potsherd says:

          Eggplants died already, did they?

          How are your tomatoes doing, btw? Spots on the leaves?

        • Found it in “Le Monde Diplomatique”:

          “Les Arabes qui revenaient pour sauver certains de leurs biens étaient considérés comme des voleurs, et les pourchasser était une source de revenus, comme il est écrit dans un livre que le kibboutz Carmia avait publié à l’occasion du 35e anniversaire de sa création : “Ils sont venus de nuit voler les fruits de vergers et sont retournés à Gaza chargés de butin … Nous surveillions la zone du kibboutz … Nous faisions des prisonniers, les amenions au kibboutz et l’armée se saisissait d’eux tous les matins et nous payait … A l’intérieur du kibboutz, il y avait une sorte de « prison » – une petite cabane – où ils gardaient les prisonniers jusqu’à ce que l’armée les prenne. “

      • rachel says:

        “When the cult-mentality is that deep, as it is with so many Jews everywhere, reasoning that the Arab objection is to Zionism, not to Jews or Judaism, just does not have an impact, I’m afraid”

        When they yell, Itbach Ak Yahood! (slaughter the jews), are they simply confused or is it because there is no phrase in Arabic for “kill the zionists”? Many Israelis believe they do mean it and they take them at their word.

  14. DavidHeap says:

    Nice resolution, thanks for sharing.
    (I can dream, can’t I?)
    Yes, please do. We all need to.

    Best of luck with CrackerBasher — sounds nasty.

  15. richpiano says:

    Just had a late meal with a friend of mine, a Palestinian refugee who is a student here. Was an interesting contrast to spending time with Bernie yesterday. I was imagining getting the two of them together. “Now why exactly did Naji have to spend his childhood in a refugee camp in Lebanon?
    Rachel- Were Arabs saying “slaughter the Jews” before Zionists started taking over Palestine? If not, you might want to consider that, as indelicate a thing to say as it is, it might be a REACTION to something. And as long as Zionists lobby to make Judaism and Zionism the same thing, we really can’t blame the Arabs for not saying “slaughter the Zionists”.
    Thankgodimatheist- (and everybody) my friend Avigail Abarbanel is an ex-Israeli psychologist, who writes very interesting articles on Zionist pathology. Google her- she’s got great stuff on her web-site. For me, and this is somewhat endorsed by Avigail, Zionism is a cult-wide narcissistic personality disorder. We are “special”- God’s chosen people, we are “victims”- the holocaust and the lachrymose history of the Jews- the miserable diaspora, etc., and we are “entitled”- to Palestine. If an individual were to act like that it would be diagnosed, wouldn’t it?

  16. richpiano says:

    PS- re the “slaughter the Jews” thing: I want to report that I am a Jew, and I shared a meal with an Arab this evening and I was not slaughtered- and he had a knife- he was using it to cut his pot-pie.

    PPS- thanks for the compliment on the song. It’s going on a CD I’m working on. Also- to be included- “Shams el Aghani” by Ahmad Kaabour. I’m singing it in Arabic. And a new original song half in English and half in Arabic. Also “Lo Yisa Goy” and “Hinei Mah Tov” in Hebrew. Am I crazy?!

    • Thank you for the feedback, Rich. I’ll keep an open eye on your coming CD. I had never heard of Kaabour before but I’ll check him/his song Shams el Aghani (Sun of songs)..BTW, how did you manage to sing it in Arabic, phonetically or did you learn Arabic?
      And no nothing crazy here, just a proof you’re a great, decent, admirable fellow. Or to put it in a context familiar to the Jews, a righteous/ just man.

  17. richpiano says:

    Thanks for the kind words. Learning it phonetically, with translation- important to know the meaning of what you are singing, word for word. Naji, who was here last night, told me that my pronunciation needs work! Working with a native speaker to get the pronunciation as good as possible before recording.