-
-
- Video: Medea Benjamin interrupts Obama speech on US drone … 18
- Glenn Greenwald on the Woolwich attack and blowback from the … 22
- Church of Scotland accepts controversial report on Israel/Palestine 5
- Half of Israel’s eligible youth don’t enlist– and ranks of … 7
- Chelsea Clinton’s multifaith initiative 14
- More on the ‘creepy’ al-Dura report 11
- Exile and the Prophetic: Does John Kerry have the keys … 8
- Wolf Blitzer looks for a religious state 12
-
- Two friends meet for 5 minutes in Jerusalem 1699
- Palestinian-American Raed Zidan plants flag on top of Everest, dedicates … 1360
- Christians denounce Israel’s manhandling of worshipers at Holy Sepulcher on … 952
- Barbara Boxer’s visa bill for Israel comes under concerted attack 809
- In photos: Gaza marches and rallies mark 65 years of … 442
- Washington Post’s racism map omits Israel 438
- Israeli report on al-Dura case is vengeful and ‘surreal,’ says … 399
- International Criminal Court opens preliminary investigation into attack on Mavi … 355
-
- Kennedy’s insistence on right of return prompted Ben-Gurion to rewrite … 97
- International Criminal Court opens preliminary investigation into attack on Mavi … 96
- Barbara Boxer’s visa bill for Israel comes under concerted attack 93
- Abulhawa declines to ‘balance out’ several Israelis in ‘Al Jazeera’ … 91
- Washington Post’s racism map omits Israel 73
- Uncompromising hope inspired by Ghassan Kanafani 63
- Dershowitz should stop lying about Tutu’s record 56
- Biden says Jewish ‘influence’ behind American cultural politics is ‘immense… … 51
-
- RT @Moe_Diab: Please take the time to read this touching article. Two friends meet for 5 minutes in Jerusalem http://t.co/1bXte5Ilc5 @Mond…, 1 hour ago
- RT @alexbkane: Obama says expanded surveillance raises "difficult questions" , but his Justice Dept. has stalled on an inquiry into NYPD sp…, 14 hours ago
- RT @samknight1: Flashback: Israel helped train Guatemalan dictator Rios Montt, recently convicted of genocide. https://t.co/oYsxDokunE, 15 hours ago
- RT @samknight1: Israel to train Chiapas police? Well. Say goodnight to the Zapatistas and probably a whole lot of indigenous groups http://…, 15 hours ago
- RT @RodrigoEBR: Medea Benjamin also told Obama "I love my country. I love the rule of law. Abide by the rule of law. You're a constitutiona…, 15 hours ago
-
Recent Comments
click link to see last 100 comments- Both Massad, and ‘Open Zion’, ignore the experience of Middle Eastern Jews (44)
- Hostage: To focus on the Zionist narrative entails that he looks specifically at the transformations in European...
- Jewish philanthropies stay away from org dedicated to Yiddish culture because it doesn’t focus on Israel or the Holocaust (34)
- Danaa: Sorry, RoHa, I didn’t make myself clear. It was the Dutch jewish community that was descendant from the...
- Shmuel: When I was a kid, my father used to listen to a Yiddish programme on the radio, hosted by a Yiddish...
- Shmuel: Yonah, Specifically religious culture is undoubtedly an integral part of Yiddish language and culture (as in...
- Another ‘NYT’ piece buys Israel’s al-Dura report– which PA spox calls ‘fantastical’ racist propaganda (10)
- eGuard: Woody Tanaka: Derfner’s a zio. He’s going to twist himself into the most nonsensical mental contortions...
- Kerry goes for the Hail Mary, but Obama is punting (35)
- Hostage: You should read Ed Luce’s comments in the Financial Times recently, regarding the depth of Kerry’s...
- Half of Israel’s eligible youth don’t enlist– and ranks of ‘gray resisters’ grow (7)
- Citizen: @ Annie Robbins Current suicide rate for US veterans is 22 per day. http://www.forbes.com/sites...
- Israel cracks down on American travel to West Bank by requiring tourists to obtain military permit (40)
- Djinn: Those Bantustans being part of Judea/Samaria in the minds of deluded Zionists.
- Kennedy’s insistence on right of return prompted Ben-Gurion to rewrite history: They fled ‘of their own free will’ (97)
- Shingo: I don’t know who has said the Zionists begged the natives to stay, and on what evidence, but even if this...
- ‘Forward’ piece on destruction of Palestinian neighborhood fronting Western Wall is not embraced by all ‘Forward’ readers (19)
- homingpigeon: jon s, Habibi, I would really like a reaction to the information that tree has provided. I am always...
- Both Massad, and ‘Open Zion’, ignore the experience of Middle Eastern Jews (44)
Our Writers
- Philip Weiss
- Annie Robbins
- Allison Deger
- Adam Horowitz
- Today in Palestine
- Alex Kane
- Kate
- Paul Mutter
Blogroll
The War of Ideas in the Middle East
I've not heard of drone attacks in Indonesia, Saudi Arabia, or most of the several dozen Islamic countries. So no, America is not at war with Islam except in the minds of fundamentalist Muslims. America is at war with terrorism.
"No Hophmi, you’re statement that Arab Jews were no different from European Jews in that they had brought their customs to Israel from other countries is a gloss. You ignored the fact that many Arab Jews weren’t émigrés at all."
Many weren't. Most, in the end, were. I'm not sure what you're trying to prove.
"My, my, Hophmi has forgotten about the “continuous Jewish presence” talking point, while talking out of both sides of his mouth. "
Um, no, not at all. Continuous presence of Jews is not inconsistent with the emigration of some Jews, including most of the Jews living in conditions ranging from second-class citizenship to heavily persecuted minority in the Arab world.
Nice try, though.
"What is interesting about the article is that it – as is usual – identifies Jews as Ashkenazim only."
Yes, that's definitely interesting. It's only one of many wrinkles Massad ignores in his "Jews are evil white people" rant.
"Now there is no question that this is very much what the Ashkenazi Jews have demanded."
Of course there's a question. You confuse cause and effect. The Askenazim came from Europe. They brought some of their customs. But they've tried to forge a separate Jewish identity. You can't argue out of one side of your mouth that Israelis have a habit of appropriating Middle Eastern customs and out of the other that they're too tied down to their European customs. Arab Jews came to Israel with customs from their countries. It's no different.
" They have usurped Jewish identity for themselves and made Jewish nationalism a matter of European provenance. "
Maybe so. But again, they came from Europe. The idea of the nation-state is essentially a European idea. If importing that idea to the Middle East makes Middle Eastern states European constructs, then every nation-state in the Middle East is in some sense a European construct.
And they have hardly usurped Jewish identity for themselves. No one is stopping Sephardim from being Jewish.
"The details of this discussion then become very contentious given the deep ambivalence and outright confusion of European Christian and Jewish identity and how that plays into Zionism as an exclusionary form of Jewish identity which seeks to isolate Jews from the Gentile world."
Again, this is a very silly notion. Zionism posits that Jews are a nation and that to be accepted in the world community, they must form a nation-state. Zionism is about being a part of the Gentile world, not being excluded from it. It was never the contention of the Zionists that every last Jew had to make aliya. By your definition, any minority community that seeks a form of autonomy, or even chooses to set up communal institutions of any kind is engaging in exclusionary forms of identity. Indians who belong to Indian-American organizations must be exclusionary, right? Muslims who belong to Muslim-American organizations must be exclusionary, right?
Why do you need a separate organization for Sephardic heritage. You're obviously endorsing an exclusionary philosophy.
"What the article misses is the larger history of Jewish life in the Arab-Muslim world and some articulation of the glorious culture that it produced. "
I'm sorry, David, but I don't see Ashkenazim denying that Jews had a glorious culture in the Arab world. I see them arguing that despite their contributions, they were never quite treated equally, and when they exhibited political consciousness, they were persecuted and pushed out. Their culture has been largely destroyed, like the Eliahu HaNavi synagogue in Syria.
"We can also point to the exclusionary practices of the media, in this case Open Zion, which suppresses Sephardic voices."
Was one of your articles denied publication?
"Except of course for the shlichas that Israel infests our campuses with to conduct agit-prop on behalf of the apartheid state."
Oh yes, I forgot. You're for suppressing pro-Israel speech.
“professors cannot take positions outside the classroom on any potential issue of controversy...To satisfy Fidler's concerns, professors must remain silent about all their political opinions, even outside the classroom. That is not very promising from the point of view of freedom of speech.”
I don't believe anyone has said that. The questions are:
A. Whether the public has a right to express their opinion on who CUNY should hire and:
B. Whether professors believe that their expression of polemical political opinions should have consequences, as it does for the rest of us. Tenure is tenure. No one is calling for firing these guys. But Paisley Currah and Corey Robin seem to think that they're beyond criticism.
Well, when you write an article that distorts the history on World War II to perversely suggest that Zionists colluded with Nazis to kill off their political opponents and argue that American acceptance of Jews is simply a racial reinterpretation of Jews as white people, you don't deserve a chair at an Ivy League school.
To go back in time to 1935 and sit in judgment of the reaction of different Jewish groups to a trauma like the Nuremberg Laws is obscene, particularly from someone who regularly attempts to explain why we should understand the murder of Jewish civilians by Palestinian terrorists. Jewish organizational life in Germany at that time was unbelievably rich. To suggest that German Zionist organizations were a unified group, that non-Zionist organizations were unified, that Zionists took the position they took simply because they were racial separatists, that the correct historical position in hindsight was -what? - to stay there and be murder? - and then to use all of this to make a modern political argument that support for Israel is just a continuation of Nazi policy - it is disgusting. And it is untrue and intellectually ridiculous. It is a summing up of everything that is rotten about this kind of bankrupt thinking and everything that is hypocritical about those who promote the BDS movement. You embrace this kind of hate speech, and then you complain that you're too often accused of antisemitism and that your movement is all about international law. Bullshit. Not when you promote this kind of stuff.
Massad's a bull in a China shop, and as would be expected, his piece will live on on the antisemitic corners of the web where it belongs. I guess, once again, that this is one of those corners, and that Marc Ellis is one of those people who will keep this garbage alive.
You leave out the rest of their piece, which focuses on how they found J Street U a good fit for them. The rest of the piece:
" Upon returning to campus, we felt the need to delve deeper into some of the issues that our trip had ignored, primarily Israel’s occupation of Palestinian territory and its quest for peace with the Palestinians. That void was filled by J Street U, a pro-Israel, pro-peace group that works to open up the discussion on Israel in the American Jewish community; the student arm of J Street, the organization pushes for American diplomatic leadership to achieve a two-state solution to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, which threatens Israel’s Jewish and democratic character and Israel’s security. As active members, we have been able to learn and discuss the hard facts of Israel’s politics and history in an open and nuanced fashion. During weekly lunch discussions on important topics — like Obama’s trip to Israel and the Oslo Accords — we are becoming more knowledgeable about Israel and, consequently, are becoming better Israel advocates each and every day. Understanding what Israel truly needs to flourish and survive, we know what to advocate for — a two-state solution, a vibrant democracy, internationally recognized borders, and a lasting peace.
"As American Jewish college students, we’ve been taught to think critically about all other issues, neglecting to apply that same critical lens to the immense challenges that Israel faces. We refuse to ignore them any longer.
"After an unforgettable 10-day trip to a country that we can now feel connected to, we are grateful for the opportunity Birthright presented us with. But if Birthright wants young American Jews to create lasting connections to Israel, and to be well-informed advocates for Israel back on college campuses, it has the responsibility to allow its curious and thoughtful attendees to learn about and wrestle with the difficult questions that we have been wrestling with at our campus chapter of J Street U.
"Israel is much more than just a tourist destination. Ignoring its hard truths and problems does it no favors. To be a real advocate for Israel, to be the most pro-Israel that we can be, our community must celebrate Israel’s achievements while dealing with its many challenges."
"Your blood libel of blaming the victim is disgusting."
Blood libel? LOL. Palestinian terrorism is a fact, Woody.
"And Israelis blow up Palestinians more often (10 times more children alone)."
I'm not aware of a campaign by Israelis to kill as many Palestinians as possible. That has been Hamas's campaign in the past. There's no disagreement that Israelis have bigger weapons than the Palestinians do and that more Palestinians die than Israeli do. This says nothing about motivations.
"The reason for this ‘not a great situation’ is Jewish colonialism – not Palestinian suicide bombing. Suicide bombing began in 1994 and ended several years ago."
The restrictions on movement have something to do with the end of suicide bombing, whether you care to admit it or not.
"Hence, it’s not Palestinian behavior or agency – it’s Israeli Jewish behavior and agency because that is where the power lies."
You can argue that. I disagree.
"So we should profile Jews the same way that Jews profile Palestinians, Arabs in general, and Muslims."
Well, when Jews start strapping on suicide belts in significant numbers, I'd guess they would be profiled.
"Not to mention Jews deny Palestinian suffering or trivialize it or blame the victims themselves and say that Jewish blah blah is more important."
Many people, not just Jews, have a different view on Palestinian suffering than the Palestinians and their fellow travelers in the West, and yes, some do believe Jews have a right to self-determination.
"This is a tribal conflict "
It's nice to see you admit that it's a conflict.
"As usual, a hateful and immoral Zio-supremacist glosses over the ugly reality of…"
As usual, you're ignoring my argument and making an ad hominem attack, and as usual, the moderator is allowing you to do it despite the fact that it's against the rules.
"- Jewish terrorism and the ethnic cleansing of Palestinians from their homes and lands,"
Jews were also ethnically cleansed from some neighborhoods during the 1948 War. I don't see you talking about it.
"- the creation of an oppressive, colonialist, expansionist and supremacist “Jewish State” in Palestine, and"
A less oppressive state than any in the region. The attachment of other leftist buzzwords doesn't fool anyone outside of the cult.
"- the supremacist “Jewish State’s” 60+ years, ON-GOING and offensive (i.e., not defensive) campaign of aggression, oppression, theft, colonization, destruction and murder,"
Uh-huh. Where have most deaths in the Arab world occurred since 1948? Not Israel.
"…and simply blames the Palestinians for the resulting “not a great situation”."
Yes, because I'm able to see the conflict as a conflict, not as a black and white child's game.
"No, it’s what happens when a foreign ideology imposes . . . "
No, actually, it really is what happens when terrorists kill people at random. These sorts of restrictions were not in place 25 years ago, and there's a reason why.
"iow, collective punishment"
Is the murder of Israeli civilians collective punishment? Yes, of course it is.
"the location we were discussing is jerusalem and areas ‘inside’ israel."
That part doesn't seem to be clear. What part of Jerusalem are we talking about? There is always more to the story than what you post here.
"hops, are you justifying the collective punishment and submission of millions of Palestinians for perpetuity?"
No, of course not. That's why we need a peace agreement.
"how convenient this subjugation just so happens to coincide with zionisms end goal, the completely judaization of the land. isn’t that also what you mean by “not a great situation”?"
Except that it doesn't because no one is planning to "Judaize" Gaza. The Jews packed up and left, remember? So it's about security, not "Judaization." The "not great situation" is the situation that causes innocent Palestinians to bear the consequences of their terrorist neighbors.
And complete "Judaization?" Have you forgotten that Israel within the 1967 borders is 20% Palestinian?
It's not a great situation. But this is what happens when Palestinians dress as civilians, strap on suicide belts, and kill Israelis, Jew and Arab alike. It creates lots of fear. Maha would have had less trouble making this trip 25 years ago.
I'm wholly sick of this series. It has no relationship to reality.
"The outer layers – empire, colonialism, capitalism, whiteness."
It is completely and wholly racist to suggest that Jews as a collective group embody any of these things, and thus, the idea that, collectively, we have to "jettison" them, is obscene. A large percentage of us are not even white on the surface, let alone in construct. We are not purveyors of empire; we are a tiny fraction of the people on this earth. To suggest we are purveyors of "capitalism" is to call up the oldest antisemitic tropes. And the new, leftist, edition to this is that we embody "whiteness."
"The Jewish establishment strikes the pose of innocence and redemption while using empire violence and Jewish ascendancy as cover-ups."
What do sentences like this mean? How does the "Jewish establishment" (like the lazy intellectual you are, you don't bother to define it) strike a pose of "innocence and redemption?" How does it use "empire violence" and "Jewish ascendancy" as "cover-ups?" Do you actually have definitions for any of these terms, or did you snatch them from the dictionary of leftist buzzwords and throw them in here to make your target look as nefarious as possible?
"Massad stops short – I think – of a Euro-American Jewish Zionist conspiracy to dominate the world."
And you say he "Understand[s] Jewishness [as being] at war with the world"
You're not sure if he's a believer in the Protocols of the Elders of Zion, but you think he's a great guy.
But anti-Zionism and antisemitism have nothing to do with one another.
"What “I love Israel” can mean other that a rote credential trotted out to place one’s Jewishness in an irreproachable manner is beyond me. If we follow that line, Jews should wear “I Love Israel” buttons to make sure everyone knows we’re kosher."
Beyond you? Really? You've never heard of members of a minority group who have had to voice certain opinions in order not to be marginalized? Never? Not once? Do you think if two Palestinians debate tactics in Palestine, it's not required to voice support for the Palestinian struggle?
"If you’re thinking inversion, take a deep breath. For my children, the presence of Palestinian life symbolized their deep embrace of justice – and Jewishness. "
Or the fact that they had a father who was pro-Palestinian.
"I’m grateful my children don’t need equivocation or strategic set-ups to wear their Jewishness on their sleeves. Jewishness is way too important to them.
Please give other examples of how your children manifest their Jewishness. I'm curious. You've basically never discussed them until now.
"Hating Israel is equally absurd. "
Then why are you here? This blog is at least in part about hating Israel.
"Flags in the bedroom and declarations of love for established states are outmoded."
What planet are you on? Kids put American flags in their rooms. If they're of Greek ancestry, they sometimes have Greek flags in their room. Same with other countries.
"The rabble commonly known as the Jewish establishment doesn’t take kindly to those who say: “Enough – Not in My Name!”"
The reason for that is that these people collectively evince no interest in anything Jewish except this issue, and yet, they claim to acting in the name of their Jewishness. It's called hypocrisy.
"I want Dershowitz to fall to his knees and beg his god for forgiveness."
Oh, please. Who are you, Portia? Maybe you'd like him to convert too.
Is it really amazing? Look at all the nonsense in this thread, yet another one where you're complaining that the Jews hate everybody. You actually feel a need to go back in history to complain about the Morgenthau Plan, as if there was some collective effort to starve Germany by Jews. Gee, I can't imagine why Jews would be upset after the war. Without question, any instinct to demilitarize Germany after the war was correct, and if you can't admit that, there is seriously something wrong with you.
Ellen: You must seriously be kidding if your example is a Saudi Arabian women's program. I'm talking about here in America, not in the Arab world. I see individuals speak out against problems in the Muslim and Arab worlds, but not organizations. And I can understand that.
I have plenty of knowledge of them. If they were elected officials, they lost their seats because their views were unpopular. If their views were more popular, they'd have remained in office.
"rather than face zionist vitriol most anti-zionist jews will keep their views to themselves."
I doubt it. Zionist Jews face plenty of vitriol from anti-Zionist Jews. It's not a one-sided thing.
"which is the reason that zionist organizations such as the ADL have a list of those they’ve dubbed “self-hating jews”"
The ADL has a list? Where is that? I just don't get the sense that most anti-Zionist Jews are people who were interested in the ADL or any of the Jewish communal institutions in the first place, so I don't see how they could be intimidated by them.
"Jews are increasingly breaking off into camps."
Those are right-wing and liberal Zionist camps. The right-wingers are overwhelmingly the ones responsible for the uncivil atmosphere. The civility seminars (which I've been to) are not about controlling the debate. They're about helping people talk civilly to one another, just as it says. It's not about which topics are acceptable. That's a different issue.
Is Israel having a polarizing effect? I think that's overstating it a bit. The 2012 election cycle left a bad taste, because for the first time in a general election, Israel was thrown on the field of partisan politics by the right-wingers. That was responsible for a major loss of civility on the issue. The worst polarization is more about American politics than it is about Israel per se.
I think you're engaging in some wishful thinking here, and part of the problem is that you just don't know the grassroots very well. People like Max Blumenthal may shout loudly, but they continue to represent no meaningful constituency in the American Jewish community. They are merely people of the left who happen to be Jewish. And to my knowledge, they really have no interest in joining the American Jewish community or creating an alternative to it. They'd be happy if organized Jewry disappeared and Jews fully assimilated like most of them have.
It is not commonplace to hear Jews in the grassroots refer to Israel as a racist rightwing policy. It is common to hear criticism of Israel's policies in the West Bank. It is also common, to the extent that people care, to hear criticism of some internal Israeli policies toward Israeli Arabs and especially common to hear criticism of Israel's haredi population. But Newmark and Blumenthal continue to be outliers.
"There is good evidence for these claims in a Jewish Chronicle piece on a Jewish Council for Public Affairs survey of rabbis showing 'that as many as half of the respondents feel that they are restricted in some ways in speaking about Israel in their congregational and other settings.'
I.e., those rabbis want to raise gentle criticisms of Israel, but they feel they can't "
It is true that many rabbis, particularly the younger ones, are on the liberal side of the political spectrum, and that many of them, particularly in more liberal synagogues, serve memberships that are much older and more conservative than they are. But they are not anti-Zionists. They are liberal Zionists. They strongly believe in Israel's right to exist as a Jewish state. And they feel constrained to bring up Israel not because they want to voice anti-Zionist views, but because they don't want fighting within their synagogues and they don't want to lose their jobs.
Unfortunately, all of this infighting ignores the elephant in the room, which is that support for Israel in the Jewish community is concentrated in the Orthodox community today. They are basically of one mind about Israel.
So you're deluding yourself if you think that the fact that young liberal rabbis, who are increasingly irrelevant to begin with, and outliers like Max and Marilyn, who represent fringes who have no grassroots support in the Jewish community and no demonstrated interest in remaking Jewish communal institutions, are going to lead to the redefinition of Jewish communal institutions. Survival of these institutions is much more dependent on incorporating right-wing voices on Israel, not left-wing voices.
Most Jews, I predict, will avoid the issue of Israel before they will speak out on it. And that is human nature and also reflect the stands of most Americans. I don't see Arabs speaking out in any organized way against human rights abuses in the Arab world or Muslims speaking out against the the destabilization of several countries by Islamic fundamentalist movements. You're not going to get an anti-Zionist wave, just as you never got a pro-USSR wave and you never got an anti-War on Terror wave or even an end-to-Iraqi-sanctions wave. Most Americans do not criticize the United States in harsh terms. The best you can hope for is a shouting battle, which more and more defines American political debates, and you'll most likely lose it, even if you gain a few easy European victories here and there.
Liberal Zionists, by and large, do not do shouting debates; they are moderates. And unfortunately, moderates don't do well in this age.
"I like the idea of all these people coming out of the woodwork to identify themselves. I hope people take pictures, and show the pictures in ten or twenty years when such things are utterly beyond the pale"
No one has been more critical of Geller than I have, but statements like these make me wonder.
Do "such things" include bigoted things said in mosques and other Muslim fora? Will that be utterly beyond the pale in 20 years? Because it doesn't seem to bother you much, and it's a big problem.
"Again with the cherry-picking of quotes hophmi?"
How is this quote cherry-picked? It is a comment on how the vitriol of people in pro-Palestinian movement is counterproductive.
I'm not ignoring what comes after.
"So what? Experts in the field of Comparative Law no doubt feel alienated by the ban Noam Sheizaf implemented on his own blog against comments that compare Israel’s laws with the Nazi-era Nuremberg laws. "
You mean the indecent people who don't understand Godwin's Law?
"I don’t have to. Every branch of our government has long-since affirmed the fact that the 14th Amendment and the Indian Citizenship Act of 1924 provide Native Americans with constitutional guarantees of equal rights under the law."
Kol Ha'Kavod. Native Americans living in poverty on reservations must be so pleased.
"Israel does refuse to participate or to protect the fundamental human rights of Palestinians as required by the UN Charter and the other applicable international conventions. "
I think the UN's HCR spends plenty of time on Israel.
"There is no way to establish a parastatal entity here, like the Jewish National Fund, in order to exclude Native Americans from owning property on the basis of their ethnicity or religion or to use racial covenants, like the State of Israel does, to prevent its gentile citizens from purchasing or owning property on the basis of their ethnicity. "
Whoopdie doo. Instead, Americans live on stolen Native American land, and wonder why all of their towns have Indian sounding names. Wow, those people from Quogue sure don't look Native American.
"I’m reasonably certain you learned about that development at some point in your professional education as a lawyer. "
I'm reasonably certain that this argument is sophistry to avoid acknowledging that America's history is far worse than Israel's with regard to treatment of its indigenous population, because you can't defend your refusal to boycott it on any logical basis.
"hophmi, a conference attended by someone as discredited as the sniveling Blair "
Yes, yes. With opinions like this, you can be sure BDS will make the mainstream. Blair is a world leader. So is Clinton. You'll never be anything more than a fringe as long as they show up.
"The destruction of the Native American majority is complete and over with and happened before any of us were born."
So, Israel should just finish the job and wait a couple hundred years, and people will forget about it?
"There is no comparison between America and Israel. "
You're right. Anything Israel has done pales in comparison to the destruction of Native American culture and society and the ethnic cleansing of Native Americans.
Yeah, it should throw things in the relief when you realize that both Bill Clinton and Tony Blair are attending, even if Hawking isn't.
Noam Sheizaf writes:
"The issues of boycott and anti-normalization are perhaps the toughest for Israeli leftists right now. Like everyone who deals with Palestinians – if only occasionally – I have personally felt the effects of various campaigns against the occupation. I could also say that I have felt alienated by the language and tone of many pro-Palestinian activists. Often I feel that they reject my Israeli identity as a whole, sometimes even my existence. Many even refrain from using the name “Israel”, leaving very little room for joint action or simply for meaningful interaction."
"Israel is the homeland of millions of Palestinian people."
That's great. America is the homeland of millions of Native Americans. I don't see you boycotting it.
"If you ignore the fact that Israel is in breach of International Law, UN Charter Conventions and numerous UNSC resolutions. "
Lots of states are in violation of international law, a system that has been repeatedly and unfairly stacked against Israel, as any honest and rational observer, including many who are sympathetic to the Palestinian cause, will admit. You're targeting only one.
"Irrelevant, it is an Occupying Power acting illegally in the territories it occupies."
Your boycott of China starts when?
"Name one with UNSC resolutions against it for acting illegally outside of its Internationally recognized sovereign extent"
China.
"Strange folk’re calling for boycotts on China"
I don't see you doing it. And I don't see Jacobin magazine calling the China boycott movement "dynamic."
"Israel is perhaps the most successful totalitarian state in history"
LOL. In other news, chrisrushlau proclaimed North Korea the world's most successful democracy.
" Israel celebrates what England only allowed itself to get away with by assiduous inattention in its imperial policies: racial prejudice,"
Which is why it's the region's most racially and religiously diverse state with the region's best record of protecting minorities.
" And in the US, why is it so hard to get any discussion of what “Jewish state” means?"
It isn't for the literate. Read a Jewish newspaper sometime. Heck, just learn to use Google already.
"Because it doesn’t mean anything "
It generally means that it's the only state in the world where most of the inhabitants are Jewish. There are Muslim and Christian states too. But dozens and dozens instead of one.
" Israel is a perpetual motion machine"
24/6.
"To call the Israel movement a suicide cult draws a reasonable conclusion, but does not penetrate the culture of the movement. Suicide is a real-world goal, whereas the movement’s goal is to escape the real-world, by presenting a, what, Bob Dylan, perfect image of a priest, albeit in a temple of idolatry: where reality is in one’s head and God is a fool. "
To call this hilarious hyperbole would be a reasonable conclusion. The culture of the movement is that it's a state of refugees who wanted to escape persecution in Europe and the Arab world and did so through exercising their right to national self-determination.
" As a supporter of J Street said to me on the phone, 'You don’t know how hard it is for a Jew to talk about Israel.'"
As everyone else but this person said to me, you don't how hard it is to escape discussing Israel in nearly every Jewish forum, and lots of non-Jewish ones as well.
"But what is the purpose of the Jewish state, or of Jewish identity? Is it not merely to proclaim, 'I am a human, and so are you, and so are they?'"
The purpose of a Jewish state is to proclaim that Jews are human, like the French are human and like the Germans are human. The expression of human nationalism is a state. It is not a utopia. The Palestinians strive for a state for the same reason.
There's no need to declare Palestinians Islamofascists, Sassan.
Nevertheless, the boycott is bigoted in application, if not in intent. Israel is the world's only Jewish state. There are states that do plenty of business with Great Britain with worse human rights records, include states Hawking has spoken in, such as China.
There is little question that if Israel were a country of 1 billion rather than a few million, no one would consider boycotting it.
"“Oh, it’s just a coincidence that we’re divesting from these companies (or whatever), nothing to do with Israel!”
Oh come on, Pamela. There was legitimate confusion over this because Cambridge U issues a statement denying it. You're in no position to say things like this, given the tendency of your side to latch on to literally anything that looks like it's anti-Israel without solid proof. No one in my neck of woods suggested it was a false story until Cambridge issued the statement denying Hawking endorsed a boycott.
"Presently, the yeas have it"
It's the Guardian. If the yeas didn't have it, I'd be shocked.
And - - the story is debunked. Correction time.
link to thecommentator.com
link to haaretz.com
Ye gods, this is written in activese.
"consider our positionality" You mean consider your position? Positionality is not a word.
"process of conscientization" You mean re-education? Education? Understanding? Conscientization is not a word.
"encourages resistance to US foreign policy on Israel and Palestine." You mean it encourages people to dissent from US foreign policy? Are you a guerrilla army? Wait, I know. You want to elevate yourself to the status of people on the ground, like all good Western activists.
" We must also not neglect to address head-on the impact and consequences of the oppression and exclusion and various relationships to privilege that exist amongst different Jewish communities, including in social justice circles, on the basis of, for example, ethnicity, class, gender, and formal education."
Translation: We must remember to complain as much as possible, because if there is anything that builds a movement, it is a whole lot of unfocused complaining.
"Not only do Zionist Jews like you disassociate Israel-Palestine from the world and from the human condition so that you can WHITEWASH your evil."
Someone get a soapbox! When we compare Israel with other places around the world with much worse human rights problems, it's not to "disassociate" the conflict from the world. You're the one doing that by placing an obsessive focus on the conflict and ignoring much worse human rights situations because Israel's easier for you than they are because there are some white people there to accuse.
" Israelis are the jailers and slave-masters."
Oh no! Is there slavery in Palestine now? I thought that was only going on in South Sudan in the 2000's. Oops, there I am again with the real world comparison.
"It’s disgusting that after 100 years of this bullshit, people like you are still fanatically ignorant."
Yeah, it's really disgusting. It was also disgusting to downplay the massacre in Darfur and deny there was a genocide there, especially since the perpetrators were the same people who enslaved Christians in South Sudan.
"Who do you think you’re fooling? No one here buys your diversionary b.s."
Apparently plenty of people outside of here, who are not political extremists like you are.
"What was the most widespread language of Jews until very recently?
Yiddish – a branch of GERMAN."
Your point? Many Jews lived in Europe before the war. Today, the most widely spoken language amongst Jews is probably English.
"Since when are big black coats and huge fur hats traditional wear for people originating in a desert?"
Since they were exiled and ended up in Europe. Again, do you have a point?
"Seriously are there a people in the world more caught up in masturbatory mythology than Zionists?"
Seriously, do you get that people do change over time but that even with that change, they can be united by religious practice and culture? Do you understand that the fact that people in China and Egypt do not dress the way they did 4000 years ago does not mean they do not come from a 4000 year old culture?
"So he’s saying that he believes that we non-Jews are in some way not “holy” enough to marry Jews. But we have to respect Jews and their beliefs, don’t we?"
Why do you care so much? Are you arguing that it is the norm in say, Islam, for intermarriage to be celebrated and encouraged? You don't respect Jewish beliefs anyway, RoHa.
"Try to find anybody explaining where these 20 million jews have gone,you won’t find it."
Well, first of all, your figures are wrong. In post-Holocaust 1945 there were around 11 million Jews, not 13.5 million, down from about 17 million before the war. Today there are around 13.5 million.
link to jewishvirtuallibrary.org
link to jewishdatabank.org
"Try to find anybody explaining where these 20 million jews have gone,you won’t find it."
Here it is.
link to jewishdatabank.org
In Israel, Jewish population is growing.
"With respect to Hagai’s statement, while it is morally repulsive, it seems entirely consistent with Zionist values."
It's consistent with the values of most traditional Jews, who often synonymize intermarriage with total assimilation, and thus, the loss of their faith in a world where there are well over one billion Christians and one billion Muslims, and where the former spent hundreds of years attempting to convert Jews, sometimes with extreme force.
It is especially hypocritical to bring it up here, given the fact that views on intermarriage are often far more conservative in other communities (particularly the Muslim community) than they are in the Jewish community. link to en.wikipedia.org
"For example, where are the reports about US Jews are being deported from Brunai for refusing to permit the border police to access their email accounts? As usual, you’re desperately trying to change the subject."
The man was deported because he was planning to travel to the West Bank to make life difficult for Israeli soldiers. If the purpose of an international traveller coming to America was to protest at Guantanamo Bay, do you think he's getting in here? We wouldn't even let in Tarik Ramadan!
A policy the US applies perfectly, of course, because there is no discrimination against Arabs and Muslims in the US at all, right?
As Boxer said, and as you well know, countries are permitted to protect their own national security interests. Go ahead. Tell me with a straight face that Borders and Customs in the US and similar agencies in Europe let those from Arab countries through every bit as quickly as white Europeans.
Israel reciprocates as well. All countries are permitted to scrutinize those who pose possible threats to their national security.
When has Boxer ever called Israel "our best friend"?
You omit, of course, that this visa privilege is enjoyed by 37 other countries, and is nothing unusual.
"What will Netanyahu do about his fear of democracy? "
Do you think that maybe it's a fear of Jews being attacked as they have been for years by West Bank and Gaza Palestinians, rather than this fear of democracy? Does this fear of democracy charge ever extend to Palestinians who refuse to sell their land to Jews?
"probably israel trying to degrade Assad’s military capabilities."
Why? Because that's the most convenient political explanation?
". threaten Israeli civilians my a**. "
Yeah, Hezbollah has lobbed missiles into Israel's north. Remember that? Or do Jewish lives not matter to you?
"also i think it’s fairly certain w/all the hasbara coming out of israeli op eds one intent was to humiliate assad and make the point they really can’t respond or israel would plummet them"
Why? Do you think Israel wants Assad out? According to whose analysis? Israel's had a quiet border with Syria for decades. So put aside your Israelis-are-all-evil blinders and ask whether what you're writing makes any sense.
"ps, i don’t think for one minute this is about hitting weapons headed for Lebanon. no one believes anything israel says. anyone who believes that is a fool."
So why was it done? For fun? Please answer the question, since you don't think it has anything to do with the guerrilla proxy Syria uses to destabilize Lebanon and threaten Israeli civilians.
The heart of Israel's claim that gays in Israel receive better treatment than elsewhere in the Middle East is the fact that gays in Israel receive better treatment than elsewhere in the Middle East. It's way simpler than you make it.
"Israel is built upon an original injustice. That’s obvious." So's America. So when are we boycotting that?
"When injustice becomes the norm of Jewish life, the prophetic reappears. "
Injustice isn't the norm in Jewish life any more than it is in Muslim life.
"To be a Jew without borders - the poet, Adrienne Rich’s desire - and without state violence – the philosopher, Judith Butler’s desire – is the ideal. "
Says you, and few others outside of the far left.
" In Israel, Jews admit they are citizens of a state which ethnic cleansing made possible. While ethnic cleansing took place in the United States as well, here the Jewish responsibility is different. In the main, Jews in America came after the ethnic cleansing of the Native Americans. In Israel, it was a hands-on affair. Jews did the ethnic cleansing."
As did the enemies of the Jews, when they had the chance. So this is pointless.
"Second, Jews in America admit that we are citizens of a state, significant portions of which were built by slave labor and other forms of class oppression. Today, we benefit from Empire America. More than passive beneficiaries, Jews in America are empire enablers for self-serving reasons. One reason is affluence. Another reason is American support for the mini-empire Jewish Israelis control."
Sorry, not our job. This is an American responsibility, not an exclusively Jewish one. You can't say on the one hand that Jews are wrong to be exclusive and then burden them with exclusive responsibilities. Jews, without question, are overrepresented in the ranks of those standing up for the oppressed. That you suggest otherwise is nonsense. We are not collectively "empire enablers." That's antisemitic nonsense.
"There is a difference here, too. In America, Jews benefit from and enable empire."
How, exactly? Because we have more money as a community than others? Because we don't agree with the fashionable leftist position on the Arab world?
"Is this change discussed, confronted, investigated, critically evaluated or even admitted to by the Jewish community at large? Have you ever read this discussion in texts that introduce contemporary Jewish life to Jews or the broader public? "
Yes, all the time. Every day, in just about every liberal Jewish forum that I know of.
"Personally, I’ve never heard of a college course in Jewish Studies – “Introduction to Jews and Empire 101.”"
And I've never heard of course in Islamic studies with that title either, even though there are 1.5 billion Muslims in 57 Muslim countries and 15 million Jews, mostly in 2.
"Even the hint of our empire location is seen by some as the first step on the slippery slope toward our unacknowledged history. Is this the reason that former Prime Minister Ehud Olmert was booed at a conference in New York City, organized by the Jerusalem Post, last weekend? "
No, it's because most of the audience is far to the right of American Jewish community, and they are not interested in the two-state solution, just as you aren't interested in it, Mark.
Richard Falk decided to use the Boston bombing as an excuse to complain about Obama's trip to Israel, among a long, oft-repeated laundry list of grievances Falk repeats over and over again.
Though I think it's stretching things to say that Falk wrote that the US-Israel relationship was to blame for the bombing, it's reasonable, given the general theme (to the extent that his screed has a theme) that the bombing is post-colonialist blowback for US policy in the Middle East.
Listen, I have no problem with that theory. I'm sure Palestine is on the list of terrorist grievances. I just advocate a different response than you do, because there are Islamic fundamentalists all over the globe, and they are doing much more damage by destabilizing other states than they are by bombing the United States. See Nigeria, Sudan, Somalia, Pakistan, Iran.
"i can’t wait Roqayah!"
And Annie appears to prefer living under authoritarian Muslim rule than in a free society.
LOL. Dishonest about what? Hezbollah rules South Lebanon.
So you'd rather live under Hezballah rule.
"The invasion of airspace goes both ways."
Yes, I suppose it does. So, Annie, what's your choice? Are you going to live in Israel or South Lebanon? Which do you think is better?
And yet Israel has a thriving tourism industry. How IS that?
It means that government do extensive background checks on foreign travelers all the time, but Israel is the only one who is honest about it. How was it getting into Saudi Arabia? Oh wait, they don't have tourists.
But you got in, and you wrote your book, Pamela, didn't you?
"We arent talking about Saudi–we’re talking about you. What Saudi does has nothing to do with what Isr does."
Really, me personally?
The bill's proponents said a vote for the bill is a vote for human rights for all citizens of the world. It does not do that. It's a vote for a pet leftist/MSU issue, and that's all. If we're voting for human rights, there are a lot of other places to start with a lot more potential campus impact, like, say, divesting the school from Chinese clothing made in sweatshops.
"Right now Israel is plugging a hole here and a hole there, but when the real downpour begins, it won’t know where to turn, because the BDS movement will be unstoppable. "
American sympathy with Palestinians - 4%
American sympathy with Israelis - 36%.
Let me know when that downpour starts.
"Stand up for human rights for all the citizens of the world."
Does this bill do that? Have you called on Muslim students to support bills divesting from any country that does not practice gender equality? Any money in Saudi oil companies in that portfolio?
"“a world-leader in technology and innovation.” This old propaganda nonsense by the hasbara crowd!!"
Well, it's not really propaganda. Israel has more tech start-ups per capita than anywhere else, so I'd say it's the plain truth.
It is also a good hasbara point because, well, the rest of region contributes little innovation and technology to the rest of the world. Part of the reason is that Israel is an open, free society, and the rest of the region is pretty closed.
"like their absolutely laughably incorrect/LUDICROUS claims such as declaring that Israel allegedly “invented” the cell phone"
I don't remember reading that claim. I do remember seeing the claim that some of the technology behind the cell phone was developed in Israel by Motorola, which is, of course, true.
The Tomacchio was developed in Israel. I don't recall anyone claiming otherwise.
link to en.wikipedia.org
If you want to look like a fool and argue that Israel isn't a technologically advanced country, go right ahead.
"Hamas support a two-state solution"
Show me where Hamas has supported two states for two peoples. Saying we'll take it as a step to a one-state solution does not count.
"Likud Rejects it"
Likud is not Israel. Israel supports it, and the Israeli Prime Minister is on record as supporting it.
"but he insists that denouncing Hamas "
I do. And so should you.
"Not to mention hoppy supports Jewish terrorism"
Cliff opens his mouth, and therefore, he lies and distorts. I've never supported Jewish terrorism; I have argued that by the standards used to define terrorism here, attacking a British Military HQ is hard to define as terrorist. Just by the standards that prevail here.
" The archives of the Palestine Post record Jewish militia murders and atrocities commit against Arabs. "
No one says they didn't.
"Zionism was a racket, run by armed racketeers."
Um-hmm, and of course, no Arab disturbed a single hair on a Jew's head during this time. Maybe you've been consulting that book you quoted months ago on Palestinian history, the one that blames the Jews for the Holocaust. I seem to remember that that book took the Jews-bad, Arabs-good view.
The difference between you and me is that I acknowledge the right of both sides to seek self-determination. I'm looking for a solution where both peoples realize their right to self-determination. You want a solution where one does.
Hostage is a good name for you; you are held hostage to your extremist viewpoint.
Maybe we'll think about it if Palestinians speak out against Hamas and in favor of the two-state solution.
You neglected to mention that a protester rushed the stage and threw the stink bomb there, and that security was extra tight because the Israeli embassy had received multiple warning that there would be protests in the hall.
So as usual, you're not telling the truth.
link to ynetnews.com
Gee, ya mean they "planted" a true story about Israel helping Syrian refugees? Ya mean to tell me it's unheard of for an NGO to call press contacts to have stories done?
Yes, I know, the only stories journalists cover are stories they investigated all by themselves with no help or tips from anyone, ever.
LOL.
You've got to be kidding. This just shows how far off your compass is.
What you keep forgetting is that bipartisan support for Israel, a foreign policy issue, reflects the public view; 9 times as many people favor the Israelis as they do the Palestinians.
With gun control, the Senate rejected a policy that is favored by 90 percent of the country. The NRA is clearly stronger, Presidential rhetoric aside.
One sergeant posted this. So, what, Ira? Does he represent the entire country? I have celebrated many a Ym Ha'atzmaut, and I have never heard anyone express this sentiment.
Do you go through the tweets of Arab leaders to see what they say on national holidays, or is this type of smearing only necessary for the Jewish state?
"It should be noted that even if the charges are true, Issawi is considered a freedom-fighter by the Palestinians. "
What was the point of adding this? You say if Israeli intellectuals can't support his cause, they should be silent, and you call them patronizing. Who are you to tell them what to say?
"'Antisemitism', for those who accept such a category, targets not a religion but a birth characteristic (a fictitious one of course, but racial anyway in the eye of the discriminator.) Moslem/Muslim is strictly religious as an adjective, nothing to do with birth accident, at least not for thinking people.
Care to flesh that out a bit? If you're anti a religion, you're anti a religion, whether it's Judaism or Islam.
'However well-meaning in its intent, these campaigns are well on their way to silencing all critics of religion."
Nonsense. Geller has a blog that is following by hundreds of thousands of people. How on earth is she being silenced?
"They are both negating the right to freedom from religion"
How? Did anybody knock on your door today and tell you not to be not religious or else you'll go to jail?
" I insist on the right to criticize Judaism, Islam, Christianity, Hinduism, or any other religion without being libeled as a purveyor of hatred."
LOL. So what you want is the right to speak while denying that right to others who want to criticize what you say.
People are forever mischaracterizing what free speech is when their opinion is not as widely accepted as they would like it to be. Free speech allows you to say what you want without facing government sanction. It does not entitle you to an invitation to say it from a private institution and it does not entitle you to demand other stop speaking in response to what you say. That is why Pamela Geller has no right to speak at the Great Neck Synagogue, and Rebecca Vilkomerson has no right to speak at Congregation Anshe Chesed.
"You only need to read the comment archives."
Is that what you think of as a public debate?
"I find it interesting that hardly anyone notes that this American Jewish 'conversation about democracy vs Judaism' has no equivalent on the Israeli side. "
What on earth are you talking about? This discussion is going on all the time. Read an Israeli newspaper.
"The vast majority of israelis have already chosen their verdict – ages ago. It’s something along the lines of “demcracy is for sissies” – and of course for PR consumption to cheer up some softie Americans, and give them cover."
Poll? Cite? Anything other than political invective?
"As I mentioned before, part of the reason Americans know so absolutely zilch about israelis is the language barrier. Most jewish Americans cannot read or comprehend Hebrew and the vast majority of Israelis do not process English very well. "
In fact, many of them speak perfectly good English, and among more religious Jews, knowledge of Hebrew is quite common now. Moreover, the notion that there is this monolithic Israel that the American Jews can't relate to is absurd.
"As a result, the tenor of life in israel – to which hebrew is critical – goes uncomprehended by the Americans."
The tenor of life just about every place where English is not the first language goes uncomprehended to some extent by the Americans. In fact, the tenor of life in Israel is probably better understand than most countries because of the saturation of media there.
"Funny thing is – the Israelis do know how far the communities are and the most average of average Israelis can articulate (in Hebrew, of course) the depth of their disdain – and indeed contempt – for those Jewish Americans that seem to wring their hands ever so delectably over some elusive “democracy”. Just keep the money coming, is the common refrain. Shared values, indeed. Stuff for comedians…"
It's certainly true that there are many cultural differences between American and Israeli Jews. One of the ones I find remarkable is that Israeli Jews tend to live with and convey to their children a far greater sense of freedom and independence than American Jews do while incorporating a greater societal sense of responsibility. The film Start-Up Nation does a good job of showing how this culture is a major reason why Israelis tend to be entrepreneurial. If Israelis disdain the American Jewish community, it's because large parts of the American Jewish community seem to lack this culture of responsibility and independence. American kids grow up slower. The Israelis are not the only ones who have some disdain for the Americans on that ground.
Some Israelis disdain Americans who opine on Israeli policy and think that by giving money to Israel, they are entitled to have as much of a voice on what happens there as Israeli citizens do. These Israelis see Zionism as entailing a much greater responsibility than simply giving money. Perhaps the best, and one of the most strident, narratives of that critique was written by Hillel Halkin in his short book, "Letters to an American Jewish Friend: A Zionist's Polemic." Halkin, Israel's most famous translator, certainly understands Hebrew and English. The book does not adopt a political point of view. It has one basic message, one that Phil might very well sympathize with: If you want to change Israel, come here and do it; we need that much more than we need your money. I happen not to agree with Halkin's view; as long as the Israelis rely on American Jews to help them present the case that a strong Israel is in America's interest, they must be willing to take American Jewish criticism. But I can certainly understand where Halkin is coming from.
"As for Vilkomerson – she is far closer to what the real task is – the conversation in America can only be American, which means it must include non-Jewish Americans – as fully equal members. "
It is an American conversation, but like any American political conversation, the people who care the most will play the largest role in setting the policy. You guys will do anything to keep from acknowledging the truth - your cause is incredibly unpopular in America. That's a fact.
"When are people going to face the truth? israelis and American jews have very little in common other than a tenuous ethnic/religious affiliation."
I recommend Tom Segev's book, "Elvis in Jerusalem: Post-Zionism and the Americanization of Israel ." In the book, Segev, a post-Zionist, complains that, in fact, Israel has become a consumerist and individualistic society far too much like America, and longs for the days when Israeli society had more of a sense of collective purpose.
Israelis are not the evil people you'd like them to be. If anything plagues Israel, it is apathy, brought on by two decades of a failed peace process and a string of corruption scandals that has undermined their faith in their leaders. Every public poll continues to show that a majority of Israelis support a two-state solution.
The debate over Israeli policy here exists in the Jewish community and outside of it. Most Americans who are pro-Palestinian are not Jewish, despite the prominence of Jews like Rebecca Vilkomerson in their movement. They have held many conferences on the issue of Palestinian rights throughout the country, and all of them are reported on this blog. Walt and Mearsheimer are not Jewish; they had a book published by a major American publishing house. Rashid Khalidi is not Jewish; he appears frequently on the op-ed page of the NY Times. So the notion that this is only an intra-Jewish discussion, or restricted to being an intra-Jewish discussion is wrong.
"You are wrong. When Mearsheimer and Walt had to to go England to publish their book"
M and W didn't publish their book in England. They published their article in the London Review of Books. Their book was published by Farrar, Straus and Giroux, an major American publishing company.
It’s been even harder for the average Dick and Jane who don’t agree with the the US “special relationship” with Israel"
How so? Where can't you go that you want to go? The NY Times regularly publishes Rashid Khalidi's writing on Israel and has for a while. It has published Ali Abunimah on its op-ed page. The LA Times publishes non-Jewish voices critical of Israel all the time.
What exactly do you want? You want to win in the court of public opinion, that's what. And until you do, you're going to complain, falsely, that your voices are excluded. Nobody is excluding them. You just aren't winning.
"Could you be so kind as to supply at least some minimal amount of historical evidence for this statement [that Jews in Arab lands were treated as at best second-class citizens]?
Sure. It's really not in dispute.
link to en.wikipedia.org
link to jewishvirtuallibrary.org
"The position of the Jews was never secure, however, and changes in the political or social climate would often lead to persecution, violence and death. Jews were generally viewed with contempt by their Muslim neighbors; peaceful coexistence between the two groups involved the subordination and degradation of the Jews."
There are many other sources, but this is a beginning. Even an Arabist would not claim that Jews had the same rights as Muslims did in Arab lands when things were good.
"The actual business of the debate was blunt and historic: virtually everyone in the room acknowledged that Israel’s political values are completely inconsistent with U.S. democratic values"
I wouldn't speak for others in the room. But the panel was either anti-Zionists or strong critics of Israel and was moderated by Lizzy Ratner. It shouldn't be surprising that it attracted a like-minded crowd.
"Lizzy Ratner began the evening with a parable aimed at proving that Jews can discuss these things as Jews and the sky won't fall: she quoted the Talmud"
A nice parable, but one meant to describe an intellectual discussion about legal practices, not a discussion about politics.
"And Ratner ended the evening by declaring firmly that the conversation must now continue outside the Jewish community, with non-Jews participating."
This has become one of those false things we here repeated on the left. Non-Jews have participated in this discussion for a long time. Nobody is keeping them from saying what they want. At the end of the day, what happens in Israel will happen because of the people who most care about it, and the people who most care about it are Jews. This is, at the end of the day, a foreign policy issue. It's just not going to catch fire in general society.
You have attended many events, Phil, where Israel is discussed by non-Jews. Most members of MESA who teach college kids about the Middle East are not Jews, to my knowledge. I'm not sure why you continue to believe that non-Jews are not involved in the discussion. I'm honestly not sure what you want the conversation to look like. At the New School, you watched Brian Baird debate the conflict with Anthony Weiner. Baird is not Jewish. A good deal of Israel's support in the United States comes from Christian Evangelicals. They're not Jewish either.
As far as Rebecca's comment: "“I would ask the question. Why when people push for the same in Israel is that considered a threat?”
Well, Rebecca, it is and it isn't. Many Israelis would not see a push for Palestinian civil rights, which would take a few changes much less seismic than Brown v. Board of Ed, as a threat. What Israelis see as a threat is a relentless global campaign, driven mostly by its authoritarian neighbors, to reverse the outcome of the 1948 war in a region where most minorities do not enjoy anything like full civil and political rights, Jews in Arab lands were treated as at best second-class citizens, and their neighbors engage in bloodthirsty rhetoric on a regular basis. The real question is how Rebecca can expect the Israelis to not see a BDS campaign, and the rhetoric that has accompanied it, as a threat.
"The official Jewish community used to have one solemn task, to support Israel. Now those leaders know in the back of their minds that things have gone wrong, and they are afraid to acknowledge as much, because if they do, the American support crumbles, and they will thereby betray their kinsmen in Jerusalem."
The official Jewish community never adopted the right-wing vision of Israel as settler of the West Bank. The fact of the matter is that the official Jewish community has no interest in including anti-Zionist voices and anti-Zionist voices have no desire to be a part of the official Jewish community. No one, at all, is stopping anti-Zionist kids from coming to an ADL meeting or an AJC meeting and expressing his view. They don't come, and they don't come because most of them just don't care very much about being Jewish. JJ Goldberg understands the structure of the official Jewish community as much as anyone (and his book "Jewish Power" is really a modern classic), but this particular notion of his is wrong-headed.
Neimark:
"For whatever the starting point was, I think we mostly agree that Israel has become less democratic in recent years, and every time the separation between religion and state dwindles, free speech is curtailed, or minority rights are trampled, it is … in the name of preserving the state’s Jewish character-- that is, Jewish hegemony."
Yes, it's true that in recent years, Israel has moved toward curtailing some civil liberties.
But it has also had its first Arab cabinet member (Raleb Majadele), instituted a program of affirmative action in 2010 to foster greater social inclusion of Arabs in Israeli society, and that most of these bills put up by the far right have not passed. And during Oslo, things got better west of the Green Line. There is little question in my mind that the further we move from a two-state solution, the further Israel moves from democracy. There is also little question in my mind that anti-Zionists like Neimark have a vested interest in portraying Israel as hopeless and ignoring the almost complete lack of democracy in the region, which really is hypocritical if you're asking the Israelis to rely on the Palestinians to retain a democracy in the context of a one-state solution.
"I don’t know how anyone can counter that argument."
I think it's really relatively easy. There is no reason Israel cannot agree to a two-state solution and then extend full, equal citizenship to Palestinian-Israelis and others and remain a Jewish state with a constitution that protects minority rights. Peter may not think of that as a Jewish state (I'm not honestly sure why), but I think most Zionists would. For all the crap they take, most of the people who are active in the New Israel Fund, which works on civil rights issues in Israel and supports this vision, are strongly Zionist.
"American Jews are going to nod their heads at her devastating judgments and begin to abandon the ideal of a Jewish national project."
I tend to doubt it for two reasons. The first is that the strongest support for Israel today comes from the right and the Orthodox community, and they will never give a platform to someone like Marilyn Neimark. They would choose the Jewish over the democracy in an instant and bear the political consequences. They are not the majority of American Jews, however.
The majority will not hear Neimark at all because most don't care about the issue one way or the other, and wouldn't go to an event like this in the first place. Not caring is the same thing as supporting the status quo, as far as the politics of the issue are concerned, because politicians don't listen to people who don't care.
The rest will hear her and have heard people like her before, but are sophisticated enough to understand both that her conclusions are extreme, that we do not live in a utopia, and that Israel's problems are far from insurmountable. People like me are perfectly familiar with B'Tselem and Peace Now (AJC has hosted conferences featuring both Uri Zaki of B'Tselem and Yariv Oppenheimer of Peace Now), know what's going on, and know that Israel is not the simple picture Neimark presents.
"Memo to British Zionists; being anti-Zionist [is] as human as oxygen"
That's not what the decision says. The tribunal took pains to remind the parties that it was adjudicating a legal claim, not conducting an inquiry into antisemitism. The legal claim failed. It does not mean antisemitism isn't present in the Union and in British society.
"iran doesn’t have a weapons program"
That is NOT what the IAEA said, and the ombudsman report you cite says:
"[T]he IAEA moved much closer with this report toward stating absolutely that Iran is pursuing a nuclear bomb."
The omsbudman felt that the Times was wrong to characterize the report as stating outright that Iran's nuclear program had a military objective because the IAEA report hasn't said so. It did not say that there was no evidence of such a program.
The ombudsman quoted this from Times reportage on the report itself approvingly:
"United Nations weapons inspectors have amassed a trove of new evidence that they say makes a ‘credible’ case that ‘Iran has carried out activities relevant to the development of a nuclear device,’ and that the project may still be under way."
My mistake. I guess they're South Asia. How is the WMD-Free Zone working out there?
"WMD-Free Zones are a tried and true concept, for example in Latin America, Southeast Asia, and Africa."
Southeast Asia? India and Pakistan are both nuclear states.
"Please provide a citation. The government of Israel has always refused to join the NPT under any conditions."
Read the post. The links to the poll are there. I said the Israelis would support it. I don't know what the government would do.
"The State parties that authored and adopted the NPT recognized that threats to national security justified the proliferation of nuclear weapons."
That's nice. Israel didn't sign it, and doesn't have to abide by it. Iran did sign it, and does have to abide by it. Countries don't tend to sign treaties that are against their national interest.
"Please keep in mind that Israel and the US have publicly discussed plans to launch military strikes against Iran and have conducted covert operations, including assassinations that have targeted Iranians engaged in legal nuclear research permitted under the NPT. "
Thank you, counsel. Iran was developing its nukes before the US and Israel began discussing strikes, but even that discussion would not constitute an "extraordinary event."
"Hophmi as usual you are in diversion mode. The article above isn’t discussing 'an NGO meeting.'"
The post is in large part about Israel's refusal to attend an NGO conference on establishing a WMD-Zone in the Middle East. The diversion is the author's, who ignores the fact that the article he cites suggests that the Iranians had no plans to attend either, and only accepted because they knew Israel would not attend.
"Israel should attend because it is proliferating nuclear weapons which are contrary to the object and purpose of the international community and the NPT."
Yes, we all know what your politics are, Hostage. The country with the most nukes is the United States, which, unlike Israel, is not surrounded by hostile countries. Of the other countries with nukes, the only ones that face real threats today are India and Pakistan, and neither one has signed the NPT. The threat of a nuclear exchange on the subcontinent is infinitely greater than it is in the Middle East.
It's funny that you defend the NPT, a treaty that preserves and enshrines the global power structure if there are was one. What possible reason is there, in this day and age, for the UK, France, and Russia to possess nuclear weapons?
You continue to ignore the reality in the region, which fears an Iranian nuke much more than the entire Israeli arsenal because the country is run by religious fanatics and is a state supporter of terrorism. No matter how much Israel-bashing you engage in, it will not change that fundamental reality.
"AIPAC has been trying to cover up the Israeli nuclear weapons program for decades."
I don't think anyone has covered up the Israeli nuclear program in awhile.
"But it’s logical to conclude that since Israel has stolen material, know-how and technology from the U.S., the political thinking is it’s easier to continue with the policy of “strategic ambiguity” than reveal to taxpayers just how corrupt this particular lobby/Israel/US policymaker issue is. Americans are children who aren’t welcome into this adult discussion."
If you spent five straight days taking out ads in the newspaper in every major American media market saying that Israel has 200 nukes, I don't think you'd hear much blowback from the American taxpayer. Most of them would understand immediately why Israel would have them. I don't think they could care less how Israel got the know how.
"Even a majority of Israeli Jews supported the proposal."
Yeah, I guess so. Here's the question from the poll: " First, all countries in the region, including Iran and Israel, would agree to have a system of full international inspections of all facilities where nuclear components could be built or maintained. Once the effectiveness of this inspection system was fully demonstrated to all countries involved, then all countries in the region, including Iran and
Israel, would commit to not having nuclear weapons."
So yes, assuming there was an effective inspection regime, Israelis would support a WMD-Free Zone. We're not quite there.
In any event, you left out this little tidbit:
"While Iran announced that it would attend on November 7, it also said it would not engage with the Israelis at the conference, and some experts believe Iran only announced it would attend because Tehran knew that the December 2012 meeting would not take place."
link to armscontrol.org
I don't know about Kassen's rhetorical skills, but plenty of people can answer the question: there's little incentive for Israel to give up its nukes in a region where everybody hates them and they clearly serve a deterrent purpose. And there is no need for Israel to show up to an NGO meeting on establishing a WMD-Free Zone just to be subjected to the anti-Israel hatefest these international meetings routinely become. What's the point? Do you think Iran will magically dismantle its nuclear program because an arms control NGO held a conference? Why should the Israelis and the Americans for that matter lend a pointless conference legitimacy by showing up?
You might sooner ask why on Earth the French need nukes or why the Russians still need them before asking why the Israelis do.
"Calling these small changes is ridiculous since allowing negotiation on borders negates one of the defining proposals of the API; that there be a full Israeli withdrawal from all territories Israel conquered in 1967."
It's the Arab Peace Initiative with the Clinton Parameters. Gimme a break, Ira. Everyone who signed the Arab Peace Initiative would sign on to a deal agreed to by the parties if it included border swaps. And you know that very well. If it were true that the API was predicated on the idea of a nothing other than a full withdrawal, it wouldn't be the basis for negotiation because there would be nothing to negotiate.
This is a pretty dumb move by the administration that allows the parties to argue over nonsense. The occupation will end with withdrawal from the West Bank with swaps. Abbas has negotiated on the basis for a long time. But he obviously is not going to say that publicly before there is a deal, and the Israelis are not going to agree to a literal withdrawal that would cause them to leave half a million people living in the PA or ask half-a-million people to give up their homes in places where they've lived for more than a generation. It's no wonder that the Oslo Initiative was was secretly negotiated in Norway, because if there were this jockeying for position in public, it never would have happened. Yeah, I know, all the Israelis wanted was to perpetuate occupation, which is why Yitzhak Rabin died singing about peace and Shimon Peres is still vilified by the right today. Save me the leftist orthodoxy.
People here don't generally support the API anyway, do they? The API calls for a two-state solution, after all.
"No one here cares about your implication that to be in this ‘real world’ we must be pro-Israel or adopt your views."
Oh, no one in saying that the real world is pro-Israel. But vitriol like your and extremist opinions like yours have little currency.
"Time and time again, commentators (like me) have said that they are moved by the moral dilemmas and not tribal loyalty (like you)."
You never lacked for sanctimony.
"You have been quoted accurately by all the regular commentators here regarding your slipper-slope slander of Palestinians and Palestinian agency as Nazis and Hitler supporting."
Now everybody quotes me? How flattering. It's really just you, though, I'm afraid, who insists on repeated the lie again and again.
"These discussions occur organically. You hitched your jackass (as another poster put it) to MJ’s absurd denunciation and call for censorship because you want every single venue for the discussion on this conflict to be within parameters that are safe for Zionism."
Actually, I just hate bigots, that's all.
"Dual loyalty is not even a slander. "
Sure it's a slander. But things are so out of whack in politics, that we can make the accusation and it doesn't even mean all that much. Both left and right do it. It's the culture we live in. People substitute slander for arguments.
"Believing that our two country’s – one with 300 million people, older history, much more complex problems domestic and foreign has enough in common with a country of 10 million that is 60 years old, that we should assume its in our ‘best interest’ – is a lie."
You're free to disagree with me.
"And Palestinian violence has been a blip."
Cliff says the deaths of Israeli children are a blip. Thanks, Cliff. From now on, I'll remember to remind you that you called child murder a "blip." I'm sure you're OK with that.
"But you’ve said yourself that hypothetical Palestinian violence is more dangerous than actual Israeli violence."
Well, I guess we'll have to wait for the hypothetical violence to happen. You know, Cliff, the United States didn't attack Afghanistan to stop 9/11 from happening. It attacked to stop 9/11 from happening again. Hypothetical violence. What a bitch.
"Throughout all of this, you said that to focus on the Irgun as we have, is to support British imperialism."
I think it's a fair point. You'd have praised the Irgun back then and written that the Haganah were stooges.
"So to you, discussing Jewish terrorism is a waste of time that no one ‘outside of Mondoweiss’ talks about. "
Yes, I think it's also a fair point that no one really discusses the Irgun in the real world. They accept the Israel is there to stay and that most country have had bloody beginnings.
"And once again, I am not upset about discussions about the Mufti – in and of themselves."
Sure you are. Look how upset you get.
"You first said, “Palestinian support for Hitler.” Exact quote."
Which you take out of context and in the face of dozens of time where I have explained the context, which was to explain how Palestinians were perceived by those who were making up their minds about partition. That's called bad faith.
"But Hostage established that the Mufti was not voted for."
No one suggested he was voted for. He had plenty of influence, though.
"Like when you said Arab politics were genocidal"
"So it’s not a logical stretch to assume and to state that you equate Palestinians with Hitler and the Nazis and Nazism."
Yes, when you string several lies together and repeat them, you can say anything.
Whatever you want, Cliff. Truly, I don't care anymore, and it's clear that despite my requesting that your repeated lie not be sent through, again and again, the moderators here don't heed it. I have more important things to do. They want to play these games with the one guy here who doesn't shine sun up their asses, it's up to them.
"What you want most hoppy is for no one to discuss this issue except Zionists.
You’re the racist and bigot – not us."
Spoken like the guy who never leaves the safe room. MJ actually lives in the real world. In the real world, Cliff, your views are offensive.
"MJ, you’ve got a guy agreeing with you who has said that the Irgun was fighting imperialism by using terrorism. And that the Palestinians were Hitler supporters. And that hypothetical Palestinian violence is more important than actual Israeli violence with its vastly higher civilian casualty rate."
I agree with MJ on many things, though I'm critical of his use of terms like "Israel-firster," which I think is unhelpful. But both of us are liberal Zionists who favor a two-state solution. We know there's nothing you hate more than people with nuanced opinions, Cliff. We also know that your tired line claiming I said that the Palestinians were "Hitler supporters" is the same lie today as it was yesterday, and that on a site where 95% of the regular commentators agree with most of what you say, you are so insecure, that you feel the need to trot out lies like this nearly every day.
"This character who is agreeing with you has said that our fixation (his characterization; because we were just discussing a topic that arose organically in the comments section) on the history of the Mandate and Jewish terrorism is not ‘helpful’ to the Palestinian cause."
Yes, I definitely believe that talking about a Jewish guerrilla group that ended in the 1940s, condemning everything they did as if you were Ernest Bevin, and asserting that they were crypto-Nazis (while condemning any reference to the Mufti's relationship with Hitler) is not especially helpful to the Palestinian cause. People are generally sympathetic to the facts on the ground. They don't especially enjoy hearing the entire conflict relitigated. That's true whether you're pro-Palestinian or pro-Israel. Angry, rabid, hating people like you do not tend to help the downtrodden. They hurt them by identifying their cause with angry rabid hating people.
"You will find that all Zionist commentators past and present will want to shut down MW. Without the comment section you won’t have a MW."
Spoken like a self-interested commentators whose views are so extreme that he's frequently censored even here.
For the record, I've argued many times that the comment section, and its population of angry, sometime antisemitic people, greatly damages MW, an argument that Phil is quite receptive to.
"You’re must have missed the lip service MJ paid to Islamophobia in his comment."
I didn't miss it at all. As a long-time campaigner against Islamophobia in my own community, I strongly support it. See, I don't especially see the point of hanging out in places where everyone blows smoke up my ass so I never have to examine my assumptions nor they theirs.
You do seem to be under the misimpression, however, that MJ was complaining about Islamophobia here. He wasn't.
What have you done to convince your fellow pro-Palestinian campaigners that antisemitism is wrong, Cliff?
"I think hoppy is in love with you now, MJ."
I'm not "in love" with MJ. Boy, are you childish.
And yes, I still have a major problem with MJ's use of terms like Israel-firster, which I find to mimic old antisemitic tropes about dual loyalty. MJ could criticize the ECI neo-con types like Bill Kristol on the merits, rather than relying on terminology like this. I have long criticized Kristol and the Emergency Committee on Israel for their politics, but I observe the basic rule of not questioning that they sincerely believe the policies they favor are in the best interests of the United States. Indeed, the term Israel-firster has hardly caught on in the mainstream, while Beinart's views are now commonly heard in the discourse. In truth, MJ doesn't really question it either; he just expresses his disagreement differently than I do.
For the record, the quote you took out of context this time was a response to a post quoting Jerry Haber's piece supporting MJ's use of the term and placing MJ in a category of "real liberal Zionists" along with Beinart, Grossman, Oz, and others that were distinguishable from "faux-liberal Zionists" like Abe Foxman, Alan Dershowitz and others. I distinguished MJ from this group because Beinart, Grossman, and others are generally not known to engage in name-calling and generally do not associate themselves with hardcore anti-Zionist sites like this one.
Indeed, people like you, Cliff, are the reason why. MJ may use the term "Israel-firster" as a rhetorical flourish to denigrate his political opponents, as is common in American political discourse. Unfortunately, because there are people like you out there, it is misinterpreted and used to constitute an attack on any Jew who believes Israel has a right to exist as a Jewish state. So I criticize MJ for that; it's irresponsible and unhelpful.
Your bringing up my past criticism of MJ only makes you look unsophisticated, childish, and dumb Cliff. Maybe this is a good time for you to learn that most people think in more complex terms than "hate" and "love." We can like some things, and dislike others.
Thank you, MJ. It is good to see another person calling out the blind hatred in the comment sections of this site. I go back and forth on whether Phil should shut these losers down. On the one hand, they give us an idea on just how badly the anti-Zionist movement is infected with antisemitism. On the other hand, they contribute nothing to the discussion, which is usually cumulative and boring because people just stridently repeat one another over and over again. And of course, it does zero to help the Palestinians. Quite the reverse, actually.
Israelis who are in Japan around the time of Holocaust Remembrance Day? Or do we say that the Japanese shouldn't commemorate Hiroshima because most Japanese alive today didn't "personally experience it?"
"Generations of Palestinians have been denied basic human rights while “liberal Zionists” hold coffee klatches and discussion groups. Don’t kid yourselves. You are as responsible for this as the most far-right settler living the good, subsidized life in the West Bank."
Ah, well, in that case, you are as responsible for Palestinian suicide bombing as the guy who actually blows himself up.