In ’62, Israel shunned MLK as ‘militant’ who had alienated ‘moderate’ blacks

Israel/Palestine
on 89 Comments

An investigative piece in Haaretz, “How Martin Luther King Jr. Avoided Visiting Israel,” says that from the time that Martin Luther King Jr. won the Nobel Prize in 1964, Israeli officials urged him to visit Israel and King played ball but apparently had reservations about going; he never went in the four years that were left to him.

And before King won the prize, Israel wasn’t interested in him. The Israeli consul in Atlanta warned that he was too militant, and notwithstanding the high black birth rate– yes, it’s always a demographic question– the black community was not important enough for Israel to woo it.

The internal debate within Israel regarding Martin Luther King was revealed in a classified document that the consul in Atlanta sent to the Washington embassy in August 1962. Exactly a year later, King led the huge demonstration in Washington, where he delivered his historic “I have a dream” speech.

The Israel Consul in Atlanta wrote that he “places great importance on forming connections with the black leadership,” but added: “In my opinion the time is not yet ripe for his visit to Israel.” He explained that this was because King represents “the militant wing of the civil rights movement,” and that important organizations “are not in agreement with him and oppose his methods.” He also added that alongside the global fame King had attained, he also had managed to alienate groups of moderate African Americans.

The consul raised the concern that inviting King to Israel would lead to “severe negative responses,” and recommended that “in any case, we should not be the first country that gives King so-called international status.” He also warned that King’s visit to Israel could harm Israel’s ties with Southern states in the U.S., who felt threatened by the dominant radical leader. At the end of the memo he recommended “shelving the idea until the right moment,” and added “our efforts to enter into discussions with different factors in the black community must be done…without being overly conspicuous.”

The next letter he sent on the subject to his superiors at the Foreign Ministry, in November 1962, presented a more complex picture: On the one hand, the black community does not have real impact or importance in the U.S. – and therefore Israel shouldn’t go out of its way to woo it. On the other, he noticed the unrest that had begun, and warned that Israel should not ignore it.

“It is important that we define what our specific objectives are towards this population, and accord them the appropriate treatment,” he wrote. He added the argument that African-Americans only comprise 11 percent of the population of the U.S., and said that: “despite the high birthrate [they] will remain a minority. Moreover, many more years will pass until this racial minority recovers from the economic and educational backwardness that is the result of discrimination.”

 

About Philip Weiss

Philip Weiss is Founder and Co-Editor of Mondoweiss.net.

Other posts by .


Posted In:

89 Responses

  1. OlegR
    February 25, 2013, 9:52 am

    And your problem with this document is what exactly ?

    • American
      February 25, 2013, 12:50 pm

      OlegR says:
      February 25, 2013 at 9:52 am
      + Show content
      And your problem with this document is what exactly ?>>>>>

      No problem….. it’s just another excellent example of how Israel and it’s US fifth column try to infiltrate and co op or turn American groups to supporting the foreign c0untry of Israel.
      No big news or surprise –we knew this already but hadn’t seen the MLK documents so it’s an interesting tidbit.

      • Elliot
        February 25, 2013, 9:34 pm

        it’s just another excellent example of how Israel and it’s US fifth column try to infiltrate and co op or turn American groups to supporting the foreign c0untry of Israel.
        American – you’re reading too much fiction. Where do you seeany of this including the slur against the “US fifth column” (Catholics? Freemasons? or let’s just say simply, “Jews”) in the document? Co-opting, infiltrating…. c’mon, give it a break, leave your imagination out of this.

      • American
        February 26, 2013, 10:00 am

        @ elliot

        I have no imagination…..it is what it is.

        Definition..-Fifth Column

        *A fifth column is a group of people who undermine a larger group, such as a nation or a besieged city, from within.’

        *Some Israeli Jews, including politicians, rabbis, journalists and historians, who believe that Arab-Israelis identify more with the Palestinian cause than with the State of Israel or Zionism have referred to the Arab citizens of Israel, who compose approximately 20% of Israel’s population, as a fifth column.[12][13]

        * In the United States at the end of the 1930s, as involvement in the European war seemed ever more likely, those who feared the possibility of betrayal from within used the newly coined term “fifth column” as a shorthand for sedition and disloyalty.’

      • Elliot
        February 26, 2013, 3:39 pm

        So you haven’t got a shred of evidence in the article to justify the smear that you refuse to discuss. Instead, you mess around with the definition.
        You also evade the other accusations for which you present no evidence and there is none in Phil’s article or quotes.
        Why won’t you defend your smear?
        You’ve made accusations with no basis and you evade defending them because you can’t.

  2. iResistDe4iAm
    February 25, 2013, 10:22 am

    In the 1960s, US liberal Zionists were waiting for America’s Gandhi.
    Then, in the 1980s, they waited expectantly for South Africa’s King.
    Since the 2000s, US liberal Zionists are still waiting, waiting endlessly for the Palestinian Mandela.

  3. Abdul-Rahman
    February 25, 2013, 10:25 am

    Hi Mr. Weiss. What next are you going to tell me “Letter to an Anti-Zionist Friend” is a fraud also! “Oops” that fraud has already been shown; and shown so clearly that even “CAMERA” had to admit it was a hoax! That however hasn’t stopped some of the more ridiculous of the hasbara trolls from STILL trotting out that old fraud.

    Good job on this article Mr. Weiss.

    link to counterpunch.org “The Use and Abuse of Martin Luther King Jr. by Israel’s Apologists”

    link to electronicintifada.net “Fraud fit for a King: Israel, Zionism, and the misuse of MLK”

    link to en.wikipedia.org

  4. Kathleen
    February 25, 2013, 11:16 am

    Good one Phil…hell Israel was in many ways in support of apartheid in South Africa.
    r
    Phil did you hear Seth McFarlane’s comment as the bear speaking during the Oscars. He said to the co star with the bear (not sure of the co stars name or the bears) “Are you Jewish, I’m Jewish and give lots and lots of money to Israel which assures me of jobs in Hollywood for the rest of my life” Not an exact quote but very very close. We can be assured that Seth will not be back his wise cracks are ruthlessly funny. That one way too close to the truth. Looking for the Oscar transcript

    • Citizen
      February 25, 2013, 2:42 pm

      @ Kathleen
      The teddy bear appeared with his human co-star. The teddy bear ridiculed the latter for not saying he was a Jew, rather than a Catholic even though his name ended in “berg.” The gist of what the teddy bear said is that if you don’t publicly support, donate to Israel you don’t have a career in Hollywood. And it’s always a plus to claim to be jewish. The host also had a joke, naming three famous Hollywood stars, saying they were part jewish. These people, the academy, actually thinks all this is funny, admitting the obvious on prime time TV, and thumbing their nose at anyone who does not like it. The host knew it well; his show Family Guy satirizes most human groups or factions, but any humor directed at jews is very insipid, velvet-gloved, compared to the rest of the targets.

      • Annie Robbins
        February 25, 2013, 2:46 pm

        citizen, the teddy bear was the same actor/comedian as the host.

        link to screencrush.com

      • Citizen
        February 25, 2013, 3:06 pm

        @ Annie
        Well, yes the host is responsible for the movie with the teddy bear. What’s your point?

      • Annie Robbins
        February 25, 2013, 4:18 pm

        my point was simply to inform. i had no idea who the host was last night nor did my friends i was watching the oscars with. when the bear came on we were wondering how they did it. some of us said it’s a robot. i assumed it was a robot. so when i got home i googled ‘oscars bear’ or something like that and that link/video popped up, someone explaining how it was done. and while i was watching that video i realized the person who was the bear was the host. i sent it to my friends via email when i got home.

        so i thought that might interest others here not familiar w/popular culture or family guy. not much of a ‘point’, but i thought the video was interesting. it wasn’t clear to me with your reference to the bear and the host, as if they were two different entities, they were the same.

      • hophmi
        February 25, 2013, 2:48 pm

        “The host knew it well; his show Family Guy satirizes most human groups or factions, but any humor directed at jews is very insipid, velvet-gloved, compared to the rest of the targets.”

        You clearly do not watch the show, because that is not remotely true.

      • Citizen
        February 25, 2013, 3:15 pm

        @ hophmi
        I watch Family Guy regularly. What I said is very true. The show only pokes fun at effete nerdy Jews (drawn as ugly physically) in the form of the jewish character who runs the pharmacy, and his wife (reminds me of Cohen Brothers depiction when at home); otherwise, it praises Jews, e.g., as when Peter want his son to be a jew, when Peter wants to be saved by a Jew, when Peter’s wife says she has Jewish blood and that’s A-OK because everybody should love their roots, etc. What episode suggests anything else about jews? Compare, e.g., the way Family Guy episodes attacks Jesus, Catholics, evangelical Protestants. Peter’s dad is depicted as the epitome of intolerance.

      • Citizen
        February 25, 2013, 3:23 pm

        Also, Family Guy has never depicted Arabs or Persians as anything but suicide bombers.

      • Citizen
        February 25, 2013, 3:36 pm

        On the mainstay characters in Family Guy: link to en.wikipedia.org

      • hophmi
        February 25, 2013, 4:28 pm

        I don’t consider it a velvet-gloved joke to poke fun at Jews for being ineffectual or overreacting to discrimination. Perhaps you do. Christians are the overwhelming majority in this country. It is not the same thing to make fun of the majoritarian culture as it is to poke fun at minority cultures.

        You’re predisposed to having these opinions because of your politics.

      • Annie Robbins
        February 25, 2013, 4:36 pm

        the overwhelming majority is predisposed to hear the views of one minority because of their representation in our media. we can have observations about it just like you can. when episodes attacks Jesus, Catholics, evangelical Protestants and jokes about one minority are velvet-gloved, if that’s indeed the case, expect commentary to reflect that.

        It is not the same thing to make fun of the majoritarian culture as it is to poke fun at minority cultures.

        bwwwahhhhh, poor you lil jewish american minority.

      • hophmi
        February 25, 2013, 4:45 pm

        “bwwwahhhhh, poor you lil jewish american minority.”

        This says a lot about your character, Annie, and your utter insensitivity to others.

      • seafoid
        February 25, 2013, 5:11 pm

        Christ on a bike, Hophmi- where in the West are Jews discriminated against ?

      • American
        February 25, 2013, 5:27 pm

        “It is not the same thing to make fun of the majoritarian culture as it is to poke fun at minority cultures”…hoppie

        Yes it is.
        Being a minority gives you ‘equal rights ‘protection—not special rights to behave in a way the majority shouldn’t or couldn’t.

      • RoHa
        February 25, 2013, 6:54 pm

        “everybody should love their roots,”

        I can understand why cabbages would love their roots, but I can’t see how it applies to people.

      • Annie Robbins
        February 25, 2013, 7:41 pm

        This says a lot about your character, Annie, and your utter insensitivity to others.

        oh gaga me w/a spoon hops. you’re like on some mission on this thread. we all know mlk is the sacred cow the zios are determined to capture as on ‘their side,’ that’s been made abundantly clear.

      • Bumblebye
        February 25, 2013, 8:04 pm

        Meanwhile, hophmi will see a slight or insinuation where there is none, as he has skin as thin as tissue paper, sign of a classic bully-boy, while dishing out slander, lies, slurs, accusations, etc, with spite and malice in abundance.
        “Mommy, mommy, they’re being mean to meeeee!”

      • RoHa
        February 25, 2013, 8:35 pm

        “This says a lot about your character, Annie, and your utter insensitivity to others.”

        Yep. Look at your brutal, insensitive, responses to my delicate comments about respecting the rights of others to “self-identify”.

      • Kathleen
        February 26, 2013, 12:43 am

        Do not watch “Family Guy” but have noticed for decades that Jon Stewart, Saturday Night Live etc never ripped up the Israeli government, Israel’s leaders the I lobby the way both of these shows would attack other countries, leaders, religious, cultural issues. Israel etc was always OFF LIMITS. This has started to change the last five years. Been a long time coming.

        And in Bill Maher’s movie he ripped on Christians, Muslims tip toed around the Jewish faith and Israel. Total tip toe. Cultivated Islamophobia in that movie

      • RoHa
        March 3, 2013, 11:47 pm

        Good. Internet is back to working properly. (Touch wood.)

        For those who haven’t seen the discussion on “self-identifying”, I should point out that Annie’s comments are actually sensitive and thoughtful. I am the one who is being brutal.

      • Annie Robbins
        March 4, 2013, 9:08 am

        why thank you roha. although your argument was probably more creative, especially your teapot analogy.;)

    • RoHa
      February 25, 2013, 6:53 pm

      Does this mean I’m now allowed to say Hollywood is run by Zionist Jews, or will I still get The Treatment?

  5. seafoid
    February 25, 2013, 11:19 am

    The Israelis were worried that MLK would ask to go to a Betar Jerusalem match and end up lynched in the finest tradition of West Jerusalem hospitality towards those of African origin.

  6. MHughes976
    February 25, 2013, 12:02 pm

    King was one of the few prominent Americans of the time who had been to Palestine – he mentions it in his Easter sermon, of 1959 I think, where he refers to ‘Jerusalem, Jordan’. His attitude to the problem seems to have been mainly one of discretion. His most prominent coadjutor, Stokely Carmichael, was slowly moving in an anti-Zionist direction – only slowly, since he had been influenced by Zionism in his younger days.

    • Kathleen
      February 26, 2013, 12:44 am

      Had to pick his battles. But clearly his speeches were universal

  7. Elliot
    February 25, 2013, 12:15 pm

    Sounds reasonable to me. King only became a saint after he died. The Israeli diplomat was in step with powerful Jewish groups and many others. For instance, Mayor Daley and the Chicago establishment set out to defeat MLK. They succeeded in running him out of town back to the South.
    What is more troubling is not Israel’s political considerations half a century ago but Israeli racism today, including slurs against Obama, for being Black and having a Muslim name. Mainstream America has grown up and elected a Black president. Israel is stuck in the past.

    • hophmi
      February 25, 2013, 2:09 pm

      “What is more troubling is not Israel’s political considerations half a century ago but Israeli racism today, including slurs against Obama, for being Black and having a Muslim name.”

      Please cite a single mainstream Israeli who has slurred Obama for being Black and having a Muslim name.

      • Elliot
        February 25, 2013, 5:43 pm

        Check out the posters on the streets of Jerusalem and Tel Aviv that mock Obama and highlight “Hussein”.
        Please cite one denunciation from a mainstream Israeli for these slurs against the president.

      • thankgodimatheist
        February 25, 2013, 6:24 pm

        “Please cite a single mainstream Israeli who has slurred Obama for being Black and having a Muslim name.”
        Will you tell us that those (basically settlers) are not mainstream in Israel?:
        JEWS AGAINST OBAMA
        A Web-Blog Warning America & Israel About Barack Hussein Obama
        link to jewagainstobama.wordpress.com

      • thankgodimatheist
        February 25, 2013, 6:43 pm

        A Jerusalem Post poll found only 4% of Israelis have positive views of Obama. He is disliked and even hated (one “mainstream” fellow would shoot him if he could!) for being black and “Muslim”: Al Jazeera video

    • Kathleen
      February 26, 2013, 12:46 am

      I think Israeli racism and some Jews as racist is being uncovered. Think it has always existed. Zionism is based on racism

  8. hophmi
    February 25, 2013, 12:51 pm

    What’s your point, Phil? Forget it; I know already. It’s to engage in yet another anachronistic distortion to make American Jews and Israelis look bad. You complain when people point out that a major Palestinian leader, still beloved today, supported Hitler in the 1940s, and then you post crap like this.

    Israel thought MLK was too militant in 1962? So did Thurgood Marshall. Are you going to smear him next?

    • Annie Robbins
      February 25, 2013, 1:59 pm

      gad hops, over react just a little why don’t you. mlk is huge in the american psyche and a cherish part of our nation’s history.

      These documents were recently released by the State Archives, on the 45th anniversary of King’s assassination.

      the release of these documents (any docs) relating to his life are important.

      Israel thought MLK was too militant in 1962? So did Thurgood Marshall.

      that’s on the historical, would you wish it wasn’t? or for it to be suppressed?

      There were important differences within the civil rights movement, and between Marshall and King. But just as the civil rights era changed America, it changed its participants. Perhaps King’s national holiday is an appropriate time to reflect on the way, across what we usually think of as a divide between the movement and the lawyers, one leader supported another’s message.

      link to balkin.blogspot.com

      and is that the mufti you are referencing as ‘beloved’? seriously? are you making some parallel w/king and our national history? you’ve got to be kidding us.

      • hophmi
        February 25, 2013, 2:08 pm

        “gad hops, over react just a little why don’t you. mlk is huge in the american psyche and a cherish part of our nation’s history.”

        Yes, he is. Which is why it is below the belt to cite this anecdote from 1962 as if it meant anything.

        “that’s on the historical, would you wish it wasn’t? or for it to be suppressed?”

        That the Hajj was a Nazi is historical too. Do you like it when the Zionists use him to say negative things about the Palestinians?

        “and is that the mufti you are referencing as ‘beloved’? seriously? are you making some parallel w/king and our national history?”

        What does this have to do with American history? Did Phil post it for American history purposes? No. He posted it to make a cheap shot about how the way Israel treated King was a “demographic” issue. What is the purpose of posting what some Israeli consul-general in Atlanta thought about him in 1962 (and omitting the greater context)? It’s to score cheap shots. And it’s to distort the history by using MLK as a prop.

      • Annie Robbins
        February 25, 2013, 2:57 pm

        Which is why it is below the belt to cite this anecdote from 1962 as if it meant anything.

        what’s this as if it meant anything? you can give it all the meaning it has for you. you just do not like the info released.

        That the Hajj was a Nazi is historical too.

        speaking of as if it meant anything, you made an allegation he’s beloved today. prove it, otherwise you’re dragging the mufti into a conversation about mlk, there’s no relation, it’s spam.

      • American
        February 25, 2013, 5:13 pm

        “He posted it to make a cheap shot about how the way Israel treated King was a “demographic” issue”..hoppie

        Well it was a demographic effort to bring blacks , specifically their leader MLK, into identifying with or supporting Israel.
        It sure wasn’t because they gave a damn about the black cause.
        Did they hop over here and give MLK support?….No they didn’t

      • Citizen
        February 25, 2013, 2:50 pm

        Yeah, he referenced the mufti, who was not elected or appointed as a leader by any Palestinians. Gosh, even the bland History channel says the mufti’s contribution to anything was mostly nonexistent. At any rate, there’s a big debate about it since he was not in the middle east during WW2.

      • seafoid
        February 25, 2013, 5:14 pm

        Didn’t you know, Citizen? The Mufti ran Birkenau.
        Most of the camp guards were so called Palestinians who only came to Erez Israel in 1932 when they opened the first Walmart in Rosh Hashana just outside Junction 5 of the Tel Aviv to Hasbara motorway.

      • thankgodimatheist
        February 25, 2013, 9:31 pm

        “The Mufti ran Birkenau.
        Most of the camp guards were so called Palestinians who only came to Erez Israel in 1932 when they opened the first Walmart in Rosh Hashana just outside Junction 5 of the Tel Aviv to Hasbara motorway.”
        Very funny because close to something that an average Christian Zionist moron is ready to repeat without questioning. I met quite a few of these online and one has to see it to believe it.

    • Cliff
      February 25, 2013, 2:24 pm

      Hoppy whining and puking anti-intellectual pro-ignorance pro-business as usual discourse?

      It must be Monday!

    • talknic
      February 25, 2013, 2:25 pm

      hophmi – dives into the elephant sh*t mouth first “a major Palestinian leader, still beloved today, supported Hitler in the 1940″

      Problem. This ‘leader’ wasn’t elected by the Palestinians, he was appointed by a British Jew and he wasn’t a Palestinian leader in 1940, the British booted him out in 1937 and no Palestinians served under him in the Balkans BTW.

      So people who point out that “a major Palestinian leader, still beloved today, supported Hitler in the 1940s”, are wrong and even when they’re shown the documentation of his appointment and dismissal, instead of crossing it off their holey olde Hasbara list, they’ll in all likelihood ignore it, because it doesn’t fit their fetid agenda

      • hophmi
        February 25, 2013, 2:41 pm

        ” This ‘leader’ wasn’t elected by the Palestinians, he was appointed by a British Jew and he wasn’t a Palestinian leader in 1940, the British booted him out in 1937 and no Palestinians served under him in the Balkans BTW.”

        Your point? King wasn’t elected either.

        “So people who point out that “a major Palestinian leader, still beloved today, supported Hitler in the 1940s”, are wrong and even when they’re shown the documentation of his appointment and dismissal”

        You can continue to hide behind all of this and live in denial of the fact that Husseini was a major Palestinian leader in the 1940s, but, again, this is not my point.

        But continue being a hypocrite and misusing MLK.

      • Annie Robbins
        February 25, 2013, 2:49 pm

        hophmi, this is the first i have heard that the mufti is ‘beloved’ today. can you provide some supporting links here, since you’re obviously implying he holds the same status to palestinians as king to americans. you pretend he’s edward said or darwish or something. pleeease. cough it up or cease this ridiculous comparison.

      • Citizen
        February 25, 2013, 2:54 pm

        @ hophmi
        Well MLK was not appointed either–by a jew, british or otherwise. There’s a difference, yes?

      • Cliff
        February 25, 2013, 3:01 pm

        hoppy is a liar.

        Check ‘Mufti’ in his comment history.

        We’ve been through this b.s. before.

        He tried to paint the Mufti as a meaningful representative of Palestinian agency.

        And Hostage owned him.

        Hophmi thinks he can puke the same lie after a couple of years and no one will be able to smell his b.s.

      • Cliff
        February 25, 2013, 3:03 pm

        September 2011

        We had this exact same exchange.

        Hoppy was lying as usual and trying to paint the Mufti as a meaningful representation of Palestinian agency.

        link to mondoweiss.net (my comment quoting Hostage’s detailed research, followed by hoppy’s pitiful retreat)

        Kudos to Hostage for owning hoppy’s b.s.

      • Annie Robbins
        February 25, 2013, 3:05 pm

        you know what i think cliff, he wants to dominate the thread and turn it into a discussion of the mufti because the amount of investment in cojoining MLK w/zionism has been immense. after his death the ‘rumor’ about the alleged statement that segues with the ‘new antisemitism ‘ hasbara campaign co-opted none other than the most beloved american of our time, arguably any time. i am quite sure raising the status of zionism within the memory of martin is with huge intent. this is extremely coveted territory, hence, the spamming.

      • tree
        February 25, 2013, 3:45 pm

        If we are going to delve yet again into 1940’s support for Hitler, then it”s only fair to note that the Zionist terrorist group Lehi (Stern Gang) sought to align itself with Hitler in 1940.

        During World War II, Lehi initially sought alliance with Fascist Italy and Nazi Germany, offering to fight alongside them against the British in return for the transfer of all Jews from Nazi-occupied Europe to Palestine.[2] On the belief that Nazi Germany was a lesser enemy of the Jews than Britain, Lehi twice attempted to form an alliance with the Nazis.[2] During World War II it declared that it would establish a Jewish state based upon “nationalist and totalitarian principles”.[2]

        link to en.wikipedia.org

        Yitzhak Shamir, who was second in command of Lehi after Stern, was elected as Prime Minister in Israel and was the country’s third longest-serving prime minister after Ben-Gurion and Netanyahu.

        I’m not sure exactly why Hophmi feels the need to mention the Mufti over and over again, other than its his only crutch to justify the ethnic cleansing and oppression of the Palestinians. Regardless, if he wants to continually bring up the un-elected Mufti as if it has any bearing on the human rights of the Palestinians, its only right to likewise bring up Yitzhak Shamir, who WAS elected, repeatedly, by Israelis. Hophmi will no doubt tell is that that is irrelevant, but it is no more irrelevant than the Mufti and clearly show Hophmi’s hypocrisy on the subject.

      • hophmi
        February 25, 2013, 3:51 pm

        You know what, Annie, if you read, you see my point is VERY SIMPLE. It is that using MLK for political ends like this is wrong, just like using the Hajj for political ends is wrong. But you’re too much of a partisan to get that point, and you’d rather take the opportunity to apologize for a guy that makes the Palestinians look bad. Just like the good little Western radical activist that you are. Because most Palestinians I know are smart enough not to apologize for Husseini the way you do.

      • hophmi
        February 25, 2013, 4:01 pm

        “since you’re obviously implying he holds the same status to palestinians as king to americans. ”

        That is not at all what I am implying. I am making a point about misusing historical figures, which is wrong whether you do it with King or I do it with the Hajj. Zionists do it with the Hajj because it’s politically convenient to link the Palestinians to the Nazis. You do it with King because it’s political convenient to suggest that Israelis were hostile to American civil rights movement.

        In both cases, it’s inappropriate and misses the point. Whomever the Hajj was, the Palestinian cause is not about Nazism, and whatever some consul-general said about MLK in 1962, it is at best decontextualizing history and at worst inventing it altogether to suggest that Israelis did not embrace the American civil rights movement or that they were anti-MLK, or this is relevant today, or that has anything to do with “demographic concerns.”

      • Annie Robbins
        February 25, 2013, 4:07 pm

        hops, i think you should blockquote phil specifically if you’re going to be making accusations about what these documents represent. and why don’t you take your angst out on haaretz. your bloviating unnecessarily.

      • Annie Robbins
        February 25, 2013, 4:09 pm

        using MLK for political ends like this is wrong

        blockquote what portion of phil’s intro you object to.

      • Cliff
        February 25, 2013, 4:20 pm

        Who is apologizing for Husseini?

        You blamed all Palestinians for the Mufti and said ‘Palestinian support for Hitler.’

        That was almost two years ago. And here you are bringing up the Mufti once again.

        And you’re also equivocating. LOL

        So

        Utterly

        Predictable

        So tell us hoppy, which is it – Mufti slippery slope/guilt by association (even tho he didn’t represent Palestinians) = Palestinians are Nazis

        OR

        Are you weaseling out of your nearly two year old slander to make a new slander?

        Either way your pathetic.

      • Cliff
        February 25, 2013, 4:21 pm

        This comment isn’t approved?

      • hophmi
        February 25, 2013, 4:35 pm

        “You blamed all Palestinians for the Mufti and said ‘Palestinian support for Hitler.’”

        We’re back to this lie. I never said this, and you Cliff, keep lying about it by quoting me completely out of context. I’m going to ask the moderator to please disallow any repetition of this suggestion, which Cliff has made many, many times now, despite the fact that I never said this.

        It is extreme bad faith considering that I’ve taken pains to say that my point is that neither side should misuse historical figures in this way.

        You’re a dishonest pathetic little cheat, Cliff, and it’s amazing to me that someone who engages in bad faith argument like this is a student of any kind of institution of higher education.

      • American
        February 25, 2013, 5:18 pm

        “mufti because the amount of investment in cojoining MLK w/zionism has been immense. after his death the ‘rumor’ about the alleged statement that segues with the ‘new antisemitism ‘ hasbara campaign co-opted none other than the most beloved american “..annie

        Yep, more re writing of history….it’s down right comical….. they remake individuals, mostly dead ones that can’t contridict them, into either Zionist lovers or anti semites, depending on how and for what particular purpose they want to use them.

      • seafoid
        February 25, 2013, 5:19 pm

        I can’t believe the Israeli people embraced the American civil rights movement. They haven’t figured out civil rights in their own country yet.

      • Annie Robbins
        February 25, 2013, 7:51 pm

        I’m going to ask the moderator to please disallow any repetition of this suggestion, which Cliff has made many, many times now, despite the fact that I never said this.

        bwahhh, oh moderator, i wanna insert palestinian’s alleged belovedness for the mufti in the thread about mlk and cliff is picking on me!!!!

        no fair..hops wants to spam unmolested but the blue meanies won’t let him..and oh yeah, phil sucks x 1000! and hops is part of a minority too, so it’s doubly unfair. life sucks. let’s all take a break, relax, breath and throw a pity party for hops.

      • thankgodimatheist
        February 25, 2013, 9:45 pm

        Hophmi
        To continue to drag about the Husseini canard shows the high intellectual dishonesty you’re ready to jump to. Husseini in visiting Germany didn’t act out of ideological conviction. He had no business whatsoever with the Nazi ideology. He was not in a position to carefully chose and pick allies having been repeatedly deceived and cheated by the British who broke every promise they made to the Palestinians and went ahead favoring the Jews. He acted out of “the enemy of my enemy is my friend”. He thought there was an opportunity that could work for to strengthen the Palestinian position and he took it.
        Sheesh.
        BTW, many a Zionist acted in the same way and approached Hitler with a similar idea in mind.

      • MRW
        February 25, 2013, 10:04 pm

        Hophmi’s previous posts on the Mufti, Nazis, and Arabs…some of them

        link to mondoweiss.net

        link to mondoweiss.net

        link to mondoweiss.net

      • yonah fredman
        February 26, 2013, 12:41 am

        TGIA- The best that can be said for the mufti is that he did not represent the Palestinians. He was scum.

      • hophmi
        February 26, 2013, 2:30 am

        “bwahhh, oh moderator, i wanna insert palestinian’s alleged belovedness for the mufti in the thread about mlk and cliff is picking on me!!!!”

        No. Cliff has made this claim over and over and over again. It’s all based on a single comment I made in response to another person that he took completely out of context. And Phil gets that, frankly. Phil is not the one who makes these stupid comments, Annie, much as I may disagree with him. In fact, most of the writers of this site are smart enough not to make these stupid comments. Except for you, Annie. You embarrass them all, and yourself. And believe me, Phil is as tired of it as I am. You undermine his work as much as you undermine your own.

        Please let me know the next time you actually express any of this outside of the cult.

      • Citizen
        February 26, 2013, 9:29 am

        @ hophmi

        Every semi-educated American knows that Israel was one of the last, if not the last state to support apartheid S Africa. That speaks volumes.

      • Cliff
        February 26, 2013, 12:00 pm

        Hoppy,

        You didn’t bring up the Mufti in your original comment in 2011. You said ‘Palestinian support for Hitler’.

        The context was how ‘the West’ viewed Palestinians.

        It was later that you mentioned the Mufti, although you often referred to the Mufti in other threads and of course in the present.

        And yes, you’re right that this is about a ‘misuse of historical facts’.

        You misuse the Mufti. He was not appointed by the Palestinian people. He was appointed by a British Jew.

        He was not supported by the Palestinian people. He does not represent the Palestinian people.

        I was honest and my original comments from 2011 cite you accurately.

        You flip-flopped somewhat and are reframing your slander as a PSA on how both sides do something, blah blah. So incoherent and irrelevant it’s not worth rehashing.

      • Annie Robbins
        February 26, 2013, 3:37 pm

        hi hops, i think we can spare our readeers the other ten comments you’re trying to spam the thread with and let this one directed at me suffice as your parting shot. yes, life is unfair.

        note, i have asked you several times to blockquote the specific thing phil wrote that you used to justified your initial comment inserting an alleged belovedness of the mufti into the mlk thread. you’ve passed on that, repeatedly. and now you’ve moved on to the unfair portrayal of a previous time you tried spamming a thread with the beloveness of the mufti, or whatever.

        for your edification, here’s your initial comment on this thread which might not be apparent now that it’s a long thread link to mondoweiss.net

        What’s your point, Phil? Forget it; I know already. It’s to engage in yet another anachronistic distortion to make American Jews and Israelis look bad. You complain when people point out that a major Palestinian leader, still beloved today, supported Hitler in the 1940s, and then you post crap like this.

        this is called a thread jack. ciao.

      • talknic
        March 15, 2013, 9:22 am

        @ hophmi

        // This ‘leader’ wasn’t elected by the Palestinians, he was appointed by a British Jew and he wasn’t a Palestinian leader in 1940, the British booted him out in 1937 and no Palestinians served under him in the Balkans BTW.//

        “Your point?”

        Do you need it nailed to your forehead? He wasn’t a “a major Palestinian leader” when he “supported Hitler in the 1940″

        “You can continue to hide behind all of this and live in denial of the fact that Husseini was a major Palestinian leader in the 1940s”

        Problem, he wasn’t a major Palestinian leader in the 1940s. He was dismissed in 1937.

        ” but, again, this is not my point”

        Odd, this is what you said. “You complain when people point out that a major Palestinian leader, still beloved today, supported Hitler in the 1940s”

        “But continue being a hypocrite and misusing MLK”

        I haven’t mentioned MLK you silly person

    • tree
      February 25, 2013, 4:01 pm

      What’s your point, Phil?

      Phil is passing on parts of an article in Haaretz, and linking to the whole article. Its news, hophmi, and it has to do with the subject of Phil and Adam’s website. You seem to think its proper to censor news that may put Israel in a bad light. Your PEP slip is showing again.

      Personally I find the first two paragraphs of the Haaretz article just as newsworthy as the parts about MLK.

      The Israel Consul in Atlanta, Zeev Dover, had an interesting idea 50 years ago. In order to bring the State of Israel closer to the “black community,” he made a suggestion to the Foreign Ministry: To send books on Judaism and Israel to “the libraries of every black college.” Alongside this, Dover recommended inviting African-American lecturers to “black colleges” who “had visited Israel and are familiar with our history.” In this way, he hoped Israel could contribute towards “introducing the sophisticated nature of the national movement for the social-cultural regeneration of the people of Israel to this group.”

      These ideas can be found in a memorandum under the heading “Ties with the black community,” sent by the consul to the Israeli Embassy in Washington on November 9, 1962. The memo is part of a selection of documents that deal with Israel’s ties with the black community in the United States, and with its failed attempts to host the black leader Martin Luther King in Israel.

      • lysias
        February 25, 2013, 4:09 pm

        1961 photo of Zeev Dover, available for purchase on e-bay.

      • hophmi
        February 25, 2013, 4:23 pm

        Yeah, but Phil didn’t highlight that, did he? He talked about demographics.

      • seafoid
        February 26, 2013, 4:33 pm

        “In order to bring the State of Israel closer to the “black community,” he made a suggestion to the Foreign Ministry: To send books on Judaism and Israel to “the libraries of every black college”

        What would informative books on Israel and Judaism look like today ?

    • traintosiberia
      February 25, 2013, 9:39 pm

      Many leaders back then knew Mr Hitler,many worked with him ,a great many used him for their own nationalistic causes without adding anything to Germany of 1930s and a lot also worked with Mr Hitler for mutual advantage. The German Zionist worked with Mr Hitler to mutual advantage displacing the German non Zionist Jewish leaders. Leaders from India worked with him and the current Israeli favorites BJP and RSS still showcases leaders like Vir Savarkar who actually agreed with the Nazi assertion that the Aryan Germany had no room for Jewish with extra territorial economic and political loyalties . Vir Savarkar was not done with his vituperative comments even as late as 1961. Then the Great Mufti – was not he selected by Herbert Samuel.? He was over other candidate despite losing the municipality election. Even if Mufti consorted with Hitler , it was no less nationalistic and no obnoxious than that of Israeli PM promising Hitler of aNazi like state inME and no more racist than the long list of Jewish leaders who supported the Fasist Mussolini

    • Ellen
      February 28, 2013, 12:57 am

      I think the point is that people and groups running around now praising MLK or even worse — pretending that they were one with MLK back in the day — are the very ones who distanced or even despised every thing King stood for.

      And Zionist groups, including the state of Israel have joined this bandwagon to re-write history. A rewriting to create the impression that the Zionist cause and King’s immense work for civil rights were one.

      And for those who do remember the 60’s and King it is sickening to see this deceitful revisionist history.

      Phil is setting history straight. Like many who now claim support of what King stood for, neither Israel nor Zionist were behind King. They stayed away from him like the plague.

      To say anything else is simply a lie.

  9. DICKERSON3870
    February 25, 2013, 1:33 pm

    RE: “And before King won the prize, Israel wasn’t interested in him. The Israeli consul in Atlanta warned that he was too militant, and notwithstanding the high black birth rate . . . the black community was not important enough for Israel to woo it.” ~ Weiss

    TO BORROW FROM BOB DYLAN: The times they are a-changin’! ! !

    FROM THE AIPAC WEBSITE (undated):

    African American Political Leaders and Activists Visit Israel

    A group of African American politicians, consultants and activists arrived in Israel this week to participate in an American Israel Education Foundation (AIEF) Seminar. The group of 18 includes eight state and local elected officials and three appointed government officials, including the presidents of the city councils of Atlanta and Detroit. The other participants are all deeply involved in political and civic life in their communities, including five who are co-chairs for the DNC’s Generation44 fundraising initiative in their cities. A number of the seminar participants have already attended pro-Israel events in their communities and have shown interest in strengthening the U.S.-Israel relationship. Atlanta City Council President Ceasar Mitchell and DeKalb County Commissioner Lee May passed Iranian divestment resolutions in their jurisdictions in 2009.

    SOURCE – link to aipac.org

    * P.S. A MIDWINTER EVENING’S MUSICAL INTERLUDE, proudly brought to you by the makers of new Über-Xtreme Ziocaine Ultra®: It’s guaran-damn-teed to blow your effing mind or double your money back!™

    “. . . The line it is drawn
    The curse it is cast
    The slow one now
    Will later be fast
    As the present now
    Will later be past
    The order is
    Rapidly fadin’
    And the first one now
    Will later be last
    For the times they are a-changin’.” ~ Bob Dylan, 1964

    Bob Dylan: The Times They Are a-Changin’ [VIDEO, 0309] – link to youtube.com

  10. James Canning
    February 25, 2013, 2:04 pm

    Should one observe that the “high black birth rate” noted by the Israeli consular official, helps explain why “blacks” generally are poorer than other groups?

  11. Citizen
    February 25, 2013, 3:46 pm

    Dunno, I never met a black American who did not have extreme reservations about Jewish contacts if you got to know them intimately. Have you? Just my experience in 70 years in America, up and down the socio-economic scale.

    • hophmi
      February 25, 2013, 4:25 pm

      “I never met a black American who did not have extreme reservations about Jewish contacts if you got to know them intimately.”

      That’s nonsense, but why don’t you expand on what you mean?

      • Citizen
        February 26, 2013, 9:34 am

        @ hophmi
        Nonsense? Have you lived in America for the last 70 years? Think about it. What has been the financial relationship of the average American black with Jews in America? It’s a matter of easily verified socio-economic scrutiny.

    • yourstruly
      February 25, 2013, 5:51 pm

      how does the increase in interracial marriages fit with your observation, not to mention a black-white marriage (begetting two wonderful children) in my own family?

      • Citizen
        February 26, 2013, 9:39 am

        @ yourstruly
        It fits very well, just look at the people brought onto the Jerry Springer Show for entertainment, for starters. I also have black-white marriage in my contemporary family history.

  12. yonah fredman
    February 25, 2013, 5:18 pm

    This post should be included in a text book to illustrate bias as warping the vision of the writer. Read the Haaretz article. At worse Israel comes off as slightly bad. Let’s say 25 on a scale of 100 of badness. Read Phil’s article. Close to 70 on a scale of bad. Cherry pick, Israel bashing. Not as bad as the soy sauce, Israel only cares about its food and not the dead or suffering Japanese, which was Israel bashing par excellence, but really this is blog, I hate Israel, let me cherry pick an article in Haaretz, blog laziness. No wonder the basement denizens eat it up and throw their peanut gallery nonsense in as well. (That’s for you, citizen). I accept that hophmi is off base in attempting to go tete a tete by introducing the mufti, but this is really bad stuff, Phil, not journalism at all, but just bias.

  13. American
    February 25, 2013, 5:20 pm

    I think we all know what MLK would say today about Israel and Palestine.
    Too bad he’s not still alive—he’d probably lead a march in Palestine.

    • Citizen
      February 26, 2013, 9:42 am

      I think you are correct in what a still living MLK would do. Interesting how the ziobots popping up here try so hard to suggest otherwise.

Leave a Reply