-
-
- Daily News and Foxman smear Alice Walker: ‘infected by anti-Semitism,’ … 6
- Slam poet Tahani Salah rips into ADC 2013 audience performing … 0
- Samantha Power’s character reference likens Palestinians to Nazis, deserving defeat 7
- ‘Your cause is our cause,’ Mohammed Assaf tells Palestinian prisoners 2
- New commuter station ad seeks to immunize Israel from racism … 1
- Settlers break hands of 80-year-old shepherd in ‘nationalist’ attack — … 0
- Saudi Arabia says Israeli strike on Iran would produce ‘total … 0
- Tough love from Clinton at a ‘left-leaning’ celeb party beats … 11
-
- ‘Girls on Fire’ tell Alicia Keys — Don’t play Apartheid … 197
- Meet the Israeli-linked firm that sold Big Brother machines to … 96
- House committee votes to give Israel another 1/2 billion in … 94
- An Israeli veteran comes forward to decry ‘how shitty we … 93
- Palestinian activist Abir Kopty: Oslo should go, the peace process … 87
- World Bank, the PA and Israel work together to confiscate … 83
- Looking for ‘a new devil,’ Israeli leaders and supporters left … 82
- Peace Now: New starts on settler homes at a seven-year … 70
-
- US and Israel are accused of manipulating Hague to acquit … 136
- The kids are back, and it’s not alright 132
- Approaching 60, Norman Finkelstein reflects 116
- Palestinian activist Abir Kopty: Oslo should go, the peace process … 102
- The MSM tries to distinguish between Manning and Snowden. Don’t … 86
- I’ve got Mohammed Assaf fever 72
- Chris Matthews takes populist stance against another Establishment war on … 52
- Latest DC mantra: The two-state solution is dead, long live … 51
-
- RT @rosa_schiano: The Closure Continues.Report on the Impact of the Israeli Closure on the #Gaza Strip (01 January – 31 December 2012) htt…, 5 hours ago
- Settlers break hands of 80-year-old shepherd in ‘nationalist’ attack — and 2 are arrested http://t.co/cl7lf302Ke, 5 hours ago
- Saudi Arabia says Israeli strike on Iran would produce ‘total mayhem’ http://t.co/Gsge0VBz1q, 5 hours ago
- Tough love from Clinton at a ‘left-leaning’ celeb party beats having anything to do with Palestinians http://t.co/SsXRaoT4LG, 5 hours ago
- The double standard http://t.co/1k4P3hhi1p, 5 hours ago
-
Recent Comments
click link to see last 100 comments- Daily News and Foxman smear Alice Walker: ‘infected by anti-Semitism,’ all but ‘a lunatic shouting anti-Semitic canards’ (6)
- Woody Tanaka: The other thing about Friedman’s statement that is nonsensical is the fact that non-violence...
- MRW: I’ve Got the Light of Freedom by Charles Payne puts the Master Narrative about the civil rights...
- MRW: ” But this comparison is also an insult to the courageous civil-rights activists who risked their lives...
- Singing sensation Mohammad Assaf has given us a ‘national umbrella’ — writes Palestinian political prisoner (16)
- Annie Robbins: indeed miraculous! ritzl, did you miss: http://mondoweiss.net/2013/05/ mohammed-sensation-competit...
- Samantha Power’s character reference likens Palestinians to Nazis, deserving defeat (7)
- Woody Tanaka: It’s amazing to me that someone who makes such an immoral statement could be considered a...
- eljay: >> But for those interested in facts, the unfortunate suffering of the Palestinians is akin to the...
- Little_Shih_Tzu: Umm, file this under the Total Lack Of Self-Awareness file: “When you continually resort to...
- The double standard (9)
- Woody Tanaka: ” In Israel the US does not have boots on the ground so therefore to talk or not to talk with...
- Tough love from Clinton at a ‘left-leaning’ celeb party beats having anything to do with Palestinians (11)
- Chu: I think he’s terrific representative for Israel, based on the points you mention! What a slimy veneer....
- New commuter station ad seeks to immunize Israel from racism charge (1)
- Krauss: I can’t be racist, my friend country’s beauty queen is black!
- Daily News and Foxman smear Alice Walker: ‘infected by anti-Semitism,’ all but ‘a lunatic shouting anti-Semitic canards’ (6)
Our Writers
More WritersBlogroll
The War of Ideas in the Middle East
Right on.
Greenwald wrote a couple of pieces for The American Conservative, too. We were happy to have him, and he I think happy to write there.
I'd add that the neocon and liberal interventionists have a very thin social base-- they seem hegemonic in Washington, but it's a bit of a Potemkin facade. Go to say a typical upper middle class country club almost anywhere and people now routinely think they're nuts. Left-libertarian antiwar cooperation as Phil suggests could help expose it.
@Blownaway,
How interesting that a close associate of Michael Steinhardt is a mondoweiss commenter. I'd like to read some ideological significance into that.
When "The Israel Lobby" came out, there was some sort of click on internet ad which appeared on the O campaign website. Obama had to make clear that he had never read and had no intention of reading the book, but knew that its arguments were wrong.
The author of a great book on animal rights, Matthew Scully, was also. . .a Cheney speechwriter.
I love that old photo. That issue got absolutely zero traction in 1973-- I wonder how much many more like Ghada and Ellen it would have taken.
The Cold War was going on and she was on the right side. Should we trash Jimmy Carter too, as he said pretty much the same kind of things about the same kinds of people?
This is why the modern neocon movement loved her. She also not only backed – but actively lobbied for! – the 2003 Iraq disaster.
I'm pretty sure she was out of commission by then. She did of course play a major role in pushing for the '91 war, which has quite different moral and international law connotations.
In an interview with the U.K.'s Times in 1988, she said she hoped Israel "might at last live in peace within secure borders, giving the Palestinian people their legitimate aspirations, because you cannot demand for yourself what you deny to other people."
Fr0m Ali Gharib in Open Zion
clearer language than from any American president in office, by far.
She did, implicitly I suppose, recognize the Occupation must end.
Amazing. Bravo Dan Fischer.
You have a wrong link up for the Desch piece, which I will look up.
Yeah, I noticed that too. I also imagined the (Catholic?) FBI guys enjoying picking him up on Good Friday.
Beautiful. What a shame he wasn't writing a column now, or in the past decade. It might have made a difference for the Times to have a regular voice that would have been skeptical about the Iraq war, respectable towards critiques of the Israel lobby, etc.
He answered thoughtfully argumentative letters from me when I was completely nobody, in the 80's.
Exceptionally insightful, deserves a wide reading. I had noted the oddness of the "true freedom" locution, but it really is better understood alongside "the Koran teaches" and "Dreams from My Father." But then I wonder if this blood and soilness is deeply felt by Obama (the way earlier generations might have felt it, and Zionism adopted) or a casual --"this would sound persuasive and deep" borrowing of multiculti ideals which float around modern American academia.
I read this as a kind of subtle vindication of multiculturalism: Jennifer (presumably Chinese-American) Sun taking favorable notice of the "diplomatic" manners of the Muslim (and likely West Asian) students who approached her about an affair of a Philadelphia university. For a long time I've had fairly nativist views on immigration, but always knew there were good counter-arguments. This--a sort of West Asian-East Asian- American
entente among elite students in favor of civility towards Muslims --is a kind of special example of how immigration is or at least might be changing the country for the better.
@lysias, No, it's more subtle than that, and Unz doesn't really have evidence for a comprehensive explanation (though he has considerable evidence for the existence of the phenomenon).
Yes, I like this, as apparently does Max. Obamaesque subtle coldness. But if one is committed to looking past the apparently delusional 2ss, should one care?
Kind of curious about the theology. Is this standard, when the Messiah comes they will be able to enslave --who, everyone? In what book or psalm or whatever is this written? Or is this a particularly Zionist interpretation?
Annie, exactly right. It's such a despicable situation.
Ever seen a Jewish or Israeli villain or spy in a movie?
Once, in "An Education" an English movie, based on a memoir.
It may be somewhat important--one can tire of movies which make fun of WASPs, which is a kind of a Hollywood default mode-- but it's hardly critical. Most movies aren't political even in the above-mentioned way. I think the body of work analysed in "Reel Bad Arabs" also makes a difference also, but I'd be surprised if that hasn't become somewhat softened in the last couple of decades. I think the bottom line is that while a country can only have one foreign policy, entertainment is by its nature diverse and open to various competing inflences. And my sense is that probably of the talented Jews in Hollywood are at least somewhat and often very open to different, non exclusive, and non-bigoted perspectives. Recall the discussion of that Larry David episode, how much people here enjoyed it. My guess is that a neocon like David Mamet feels fairly isolated in Hollywood, the way Bill Kristol does not at all in Washington.
It's interesting--I've never known it before to be an issue before in city politics (which I once followed closely). It could be assumed that all candidates were very pro-Zionist, and the ones about whom there might have been suspicions (David Dinkins) simply pandered more. Giuliani had to fight a headwind of suspicion after his showy arrests of Wall Street crooks who happened, mostly, to be Jewish, and of course he then compensated by speaking as if Arafat was Hitler. The single exception was Michael Bloomberg, a liberal Zionist I assume, and wealthy and self-confident to be above all of this. In retrospect, he seems like a genuine giant among pygmies. But I agree it would be quite interesting if someone said, simply, "yes I like Israel but they would be better off making a fair peace with the Palestinians" a J Street line. I suspect such a candidate might do quite well.
I like the post, and agree that Netanyahu has sort of succeeded. But I don't agree with the characterization of Argo, which I thought was fairly nuanced of its depiction of Iranians, even as it portrayed (why not? ) brutality in a country in the throes of revolution. Do others agree?
Les, yeah I knew that, or at that least peasants used to say it about Stalin during the horrors of forced collectivization. That was my intended point, sort of self-mocking my (and many others') trust in Obama.
Good f-ing god. If only Obama knew.
Beinart's book has a similar quote from a State Department official--"Sometimes I feel like we're only working for Israel" or something, describing one of the countless diplomatic full court presses to shield Israel from critical UN resolutions. It really would be nice if Hagel could mount a truth defense and call witnesses.
Superbly researched post!
Obama could have an interesting trip if he made time to meet with a group of Israeli dissidents, not necessarily post Zionists, but people like Laor, and the director of Btselem. Why the heck not?
Maybe Coke and Pepsi will oppose the occupation.
My first thought: many years ago a history professor (Henry Graff, at Columbia) referred to the Senate as "the coward's branch of government"-- suggesting that the Democratic Party might do better to look for a governor as its next presidential candidate. One of the reasons I supported Carter in 1975.
Well, let's see if the cravenness works. Hagel's job isn't to run US Mideast diplomacy anyway. If he's confirmed, it will mark the first time Obama has selected an Iraq war foe for a top foreign policy position, and Hagel will be able to hire a lot of good realists (not leftists, I suspect) and give them experience and credentials which will propel their careers. That's worth a lot. (Paris is worth a mass.) If someone wants speak about the settlements, that's for Kerry or Obama to do.
Of course, it would be nice if he could get confirmed without this.
CUFI people who came to lobby versus Hagel
on Monday -Tuesday had their hotels and transportation paid for by a mystery donor. I wonder whether the AIPAC lobbyists feel just a smidge jealous.
The principle is isolate Lev Leviev, kind of liking isolating Sodastream but with a local New York angle. BTW, I and my wife are in the picture. Fun singing rewritten and politicized Christmas carols on Madison Avenue, also an important principle.
I bet Troy is right too, that MLK did say make a pro-Israel statement (at Marty Peretz's house in Cambridge, on a fundraising mission). But curious was that he apparently never said anything like that in public. Not that it would have been unpopular in late 60's America. There must have been people (like Marty!) encouraging him to go public with his Zionism, especially after the emergence of some pretty over-the-top anti-Zionism in the black left. Yet he kept silent.
And kudos to Morgan Bach. It is inconceivable that King and the mainstream civil rights movement wouldn't stand up for Palestinian self-determination today.
Yes, as Krauss said, Livni is a fraud as a peacemaker. But a good sign at least that BDS sufficiently resonates now in Israel that she would think that worry about it works as a campaign theme.
Very important post. I had no idea it pushed buttons like this, apart from the torture issue. The vast majority of Iraq war era films did not promote Islamophobia, I don't think. "Stop Loss" last one I saw.
Does Israel actually want an intifada?
No question about it. They will use it as an excuse and cover to decapitate the Palestinian resistance and do some widespread ethnic cleansing. It's very difficult, but the Palestinians really ought to try not to play into their hands.
Are there any Palestinians on Labor's list? Does Labor plan to campaign in Arab towns and neighborhoods? I'm sure the non-voting is a form of protest, but it could easily be mitigated if Labor was willing to consider Palestinians who live west of the Green line to be fellow citizens and part of Israel, which for the most part it doesn't. (This I've been told was something Rabin was seeking, actually making efforts to, change.)
I'm sure the deal is structured so that Gore and his partners don't get paid unless Al Jazeera gets on. I wouldn't bet on David Cohen versus an Al Gore being paid $100 million to lobby for freedom of speech.
link to hsph.harvard.edu
True fact.
Count me as optimistic. Obama did this over-cautiously, but it seems that he did it. If Hagel is confirmed, as I think likely, it will be the most substantial defeat for the lobby perhaps in my lifetime. Its loss on AWACs to Saudi Arabia will seem minor league. And once they lose one big one, there's the possibility they will lose their deterrent power. Be seen as a paper tiger. The Hagel confirmation will be the first domino!
I'm not counting victory yet; but as Jerry Haber pointed out several weeks ago, even a losing confirmation fight will be extremely educational, and will pave the way for future victories.
Plus Al Jazeera-- coming to a cable station near you. No longer will we have to breathe heavily when Chris Matthews tip toes up somewhere near the truth. They can bloody hire Chris Matthews and tell him to call it like sees them. Or someone else. And we're only four days into January!
These are so nice. I'm briefly in the New York video, with my wife and future son-in law. It's the only time I manage to sing "Christmas" carols any more. The Adalah organizers are so talented, so professional!
What about the Russians--many of whom surely celebrate Christmas?
Well, I'm not at all sure it's the wrong way if you're trying to appeal to an audience--Senators, and their aides-- who are reflexively at least somewhat pro-Israel, (though not pro-Likud) , who might not want a war with Iran, but who certainly don't want to create a big controversy for themselves over Israel. After all, it's not Hagel's job to create a controversy over Israel. This stuff gives them a security blanket, a reason to justify their vote for Hagel as not controversial, or anti-Israel--and why shouldn't it be, since it's not that Hagel is really Noam Chomsky or something. He's a fairly standard politician, with more courage than most. Hagel is not being portrayed as in favor of the settlements, or opposed to a viable Palestinian state (not that this matters for sec-Def.). Anyway, I think it's quite effective--sad that it should be necessary, but politics the art of the possible.
Can't someone find and repost the video of Walzer walking around with Marty Peretz trying to avoid Harvard demonstrators protesting the celebration of Marty day, or whatever it was. It's funny.
link to theamericanconservative.com
Big fan of this comment. Something I wonder a lot about--the extent to which hasbara speakers believe in what they're saying.
Wonder if Jodi will report on this.
Yes, you're right. I had wondered about the Jerusalem bit, whether it was a kind of Christian Zionist messaging. But it's not that at all, it's liberationist messaging, to be taken to Jerusalem.
Astonished by this post. Completely astonished. I really assumed that all fairly smart Jews who didn't live in Alaska or something had some sort of informed views, racist, reactionary, ambivalent, sensible, tormented, guilty--something. But not valley girl ignorant.
I'm with Adele. They didn't retract, it's a non-apology- apology. They're not speaking as individuals, and they're always some institutional bases that need to be covered. They've covered them now. It's a small step forward.
@Pakistani Princess
(Can't resist that name). I'm not the Scott this thread is about, btw. The reason people don't home school their kids is that they want/need to get them out of the house for a few hours, or the entire day. Kids mostly learn to read and write in school, at least in the US the indoctrination is not so intense it can't be mitigated. And any educated or concerned parent can always talk to their kid about what they're learning, argue about it if it seems stilted, or false, present other source material, etc. It was done with me (by a pinkish stepfather during the height of the Cold War) and made me seem very interesting to other kids in my class.
I'd also like to address Kathleen's issue re late comers to the I/P question. For the overwhelming majority of Americans, including me-- it seemed that prior to 1992 or so there were more pressing issues, and then that Oslo would provide a passably just solution to the Palestine question. It took about seven or eight years to figure out that Oslo was a scam, that Israel didn't want a two state solution, and that Israel (and its American lobby) would keep pushing America into mid-east wars. That's why there's been an explosion of interest in the issue since 2003 or so.
Sounds much worse, actually. As a former New Yorker, I believe that NY congressmen are at least somewhat exposed to reality, and King's IRAish links expose him to some moral complexity. Not to apologize for him, but this sounds worse. On the other hand, will sound more like a caricature of stupid.
Li, sorry. Probably same character though.
I think the separate peace concept floated by Daryl Lee wouldn't end the matter. Once the West Bank Palestinians are allowed to vote, they would inevitably be included in governmental coalitions, and would presumably press for both freedom of movement and maintenance of cultural/economic connections with Gaza, even though the Gaza Palestinians were part not part of "the same country." I suspect that that having Palestinian voters on the West Bank would, after fifteen years or so, tone down the (Israeli) hatreds and break down some walls. Maybe I'm naive, or maybe the Israeli right wingers floating this idea are, not sure.
Sounds like he should have supported Romney. I wonder whether he is deluded, or me--for supporting Obama.
If the pied noirs had nuclear weapons, they would have used them.
The above meant to be in reply to Krauss, who was talking about Rupert and his wife.
Curiously, Murdoch's wife Wendi often uses the word "Jewish" in an atonal context – "You Jewish, right? I know you Jewish!" – that makes Murdoch's minders jump.)
The above from Michael Wolf's recent column about Murdoch's twitters about the press.
I assume Stevie W. is being well paid, and may just--as an aging and no longer prime time star--need the money.
Yeah, spurned it when it was repeated five years later too. A huge turning point in the conflict I think --though barely mentioned in the MSM. It's hard to see how allegedly smart people can be so stupid.
Where, as in Charleston, SC there is no memorial to the slaves who built and sustained that city, nada. But right smack in the middle of that city is the mega European Holocaust memorial.
Powerful point I've never seen before. Deserves a wider airing.
A funny comment, but I thought Zbig's language was not too cool, not too hot, just right. Everyone knows what he's talking about-- specific constituencies versus the national interest.
A lot of people who are pro-Palestine, or at least luke warm towars Zionism, now and back then, were cold warriors. They believed communism was an evil system, feared the expansion of Soviet power, saw every international issue through that metric. True of George Marshall, George Kennan, etc. And Zbig. I don't know the first thing about East Timor, but I'm sure he viewed US policy options through that metric. It's what the realists did.
Maggie, I thought it was a great article. I very much doubt that more dialogue is what is needed at this point-- unless it's an internal dialogue among Zionists about where this is heading. And that is made more possible by changing the external environment Israel operates in. In America it's long been, you're great, we'll give you whatever you want, just ask us how high you want us to jump. Your demo changes that, a bit. Congrats for getting out.
Yikes. What are the demands of the Turkish Kurds? (Beyond those for legal treatment of the political prisoners described here.) To me it's one of those intractable old ethnic issues, liked those which plague Eastern Europe, and I can't help being conscious of the way various neocons have tried to lever Kurdish demands against various states in the region that were resisting the US for one reason or another. (Safire and Iran come to mind.) I do suspect Kurds are discriminated against in Turkey, and also that they are treated better than Palestinians by Israel.
I mean, it is actually true that Turkey is a successful Islamic democracy, and Erdogan has done a lot to support the Palestinians. Is the bottom line whether one supports a Kurdish state carved out of Turkey, Iran, and Iraq? I don't know, but American and European diplomats never have, and I suspect for good reasons.
Annie,
I'm not sure of the PCUSA-PCA split, but Wimberly is not marginal to the liberal church scene in DC. . I've attended his church before. He's very much a progressive, except, of course on Palestine. Not sure the reason why, though others have speculated.
Very interesting idea, that Clinton might have "gone Carter" without Hillary's career to think about. I suspect the whole Zionist fundraising thing will be a bit weaker next time-- that there will be room to run without kowtowing to it. Nevertheless the idea of a Hillary candidacy makes even the left side of the Yankee infield seem youthful.
Somehow I think this lacks mass or populist appeal.
Great job, Phil and Max. Kind of astonishing that this Saad Ghorayeb woman still hasn't figured out where the quotation she mis-cited in her dissertation actually came from. It seems that she has now more than five years to track it down. I'm reminded of the Doonesbury cartoon with OJ Simpson saying he's going to find out the real murderer, any day now.
Actually, there was some lack of enthusiam for the Israeli victory in the Protestant religious press (Catholics too) --manifested by a readiness to print competing interpretations of what happened. There were some "Arabists" teaching at Yale and elsewhere, who understood the Palestinian narrative and knew that Israel had been pushing for this war, and they were published. And magazines like Christian Century warned early on against annexations of J'lem and West Bank. But of course this from educated, mainlin, well-informed types: most Protestants were as enthusiastic as everyone else. "Time" was relatively pro-Israel, and some speculated this was because Luce had died right before the war.
Phil means, I'm pretty sure, that Sirhan Sirhan was a Palestinian pissed off at Kennedy's knee jerk support of Israel (as well a being an unbalanced murderer, or course).
I think Obama would do well to tout all the goodies he's given Israel, and say he's ultra committed to Israel's security--but to emphasize that there can be differences of perspective and interest, phrased very carefully. I think there is a considerable "Netanyahu is a jerk" vote out there somewhere, and stressing American independence likely to win him more votes than he loses.
Yes, agree completely with Donald. I've been familiar with analogous cases-- the very talented late columnist Joe Sobran, who wrote brilliant criticism of Israel for National Review in the 1980's, was fired from that magazine (under pressure from the Podhoretzes) and gradually sunk into the fever swamps--though nothing he ever said was so eggregious as accusing Zionists of a role in "creating" the Holocaust. But Sobran --much beloved by many on the paleocon right, and truly gifted as a writer--made himself unusable--publishing him would do more harm than good.
Really cunning of these "Jew haters" to take major roles in Jewish led organizations, isn't it biorabbi?
It's almost enough to make me want to dwell on Sweden's World War 2 record.
Yes, well stated. I'm familiar with Ann Wright through Code Pink. A formidable asset on the side of justice. I don't know from Greta Berlin, though I've read most of the posts I don't yet think I know the real story. But to attack Ann Wright like this is pathetic.
I've seen that girl in the Columbia demo. She's actually an IDF vet, which might complicate any lawsuits against her.
It is great. The Times news story mentioned the same thing, but way inside. And the Obama response: get Madeleine Albright to criticize Romney for having no ideas. It's so lame. If Obama doesn't seize this opportunity, he doesn't deserve re-election.
Really I didn't think the Israelis could surprise me much anymore, but. . .
When will Foxman weigh in? I don't doubt that he will, he really can't avoid it and proclaim himself a foe of bigotry.
Krauss, the last sentences were well put and true, if not easy to footnote. Jews are less diverse than WASPs, who came from different regions and have mostly long since abandoned any tight sense of cohesive identity. Asians and Hispanics are groups only in the US context. Of course one can point to external reasons for Jewish cohesiveness, as well as internal ones. I think it very unlikely that a truthful discourse on this subject would spiral into into anti-Semitism in America, but what do I know. To make that so--to both have that discourse and keep it within its proper boundaries --is the great challenge to people who care about this counrty.
An amazing anecdote! This stuff, and the spirit behind it, so long hidden from Americans. My late father-in-law used to be involved with UN peacekeepers in Lebanon, as a diplomat/supervisor. He would vaguely allude to things similar, but I never pressed him. When he was alive, I never really understood his lack of enthusiasm for Israel.
Nice. Historically Quaker school, seems quite good. Hadn't heard of it.
Yeah, I noticed that. Doubt it was an accident. Hard to argue against too.
And what got into Bob Merry? He's always been smart, extremely disciplined and productive, kind of understated, guy. This was boldly awesome.
Yeah, I saw it and had the same gag reaction. But perhaps she was subtly trying to advance the one state solution. (kidding)
Yes, right about the Times and Post. Curious if and how these things are covered in Europe, also an important diplomatic actor/Israeli trading partner.
Great piece. I share Marsha's (implicit) sense that Ryan isn't an altogether spoken for total neocon. Most people from the Midwest aren't, perhaps especially Catholics.
Thanks for this. It's such a frequently used rhetorical gambit, surprising since the answer is so apparent. Don't the people who raise this question know the answer? Does the implied answer of "anti-Semitism that's why" actually work on anyone?
BTW, I was a Riverdale Country parent for a while, glad you're teaching there.
No, I'm saying that from what I know about him, his views have the chance to grow into something reasonable once he is something other than a budget oriented house member. He's smart. He may well educated himself. He is ambitious, and wasn't likely, before, to do anything that would get off the rail. But now he has the opportunity. Also, I would just hazard a guess that there are few Wisconsin Irish Catholics who are fanatical Zionists. Ryan may be an exception, but some aspects of regional and ethnic political culture endure.
I'm keeping an open mind on Ryan. That statement he appends could be signed by Bill Clinton. Of course a two state solution would provide for Israeli security. That's the point.
I want to get this joke (it helped when I stopped reading "cellophane" as "cell-phone") but I don't. Someone can explain?
The Dayan quote (quite eloquent actually) is found in Avi Shlaim's The Iron Wall.
He's great. When it's time to run new ads to counter the counterads, he can use these quotes. And an billboard debate--which seems to exist now despite the efforts of, etc. -- has got be a net win.
I actually like "occupation"--in part because it so discomfits the other side. It also may draw in a potentially broader constituency than "apartheid". Americans fought to liberate Europe from "occupation"; the struggle against "apartheid" was something most of us watched from the sidelines.
Extremely interesting, if Cantor is indeed at all vulnerable. The kind of criticism of Israel that appears on this blog, or is done by high level academics like W & M, is extremely well modulated and nuanced. But in a rough and tumble campaign? In any case, a political story well worth following.
My favorite of your many posts, hophmi.
The puzzle is, if right wing Zionism is so important to people like Penny, why did she support Obama in the first place? He did have a past record of making clear his support for the two state solution, and had left a lot of hints out there of his desire (even discounting his friendships with people like Khalidi). And there was (as Beinart points out in his book) a well-established liberal Zionist community in Chicago which had drawn Obama in. Was Pritzker simply unaware of this, or in some way part of it? Or has she moved to the right on the issue in the last four years--a scary possibility?
Oh bring it on-- a First Amendment fight about whether it's okay to criticize Israel!
Let it go the Supreme Court.
I'm not necessarily a fan of the Balfour Declaration, but didn't it say a homeland for the Jews should be constructed without prejudice to the rights of the indigenous inhabitants, rather specifically? (I'm sure someone here has the exact quote.) I would think virtually everything Israel has done, from ethnic cleansing in '48 to house demolitions and denial of water today would be in violation of that statement. Can't they find a better justification in international law? Probably not.
As a small addendum to your point: in the old days, there were a lot of scholarships for poor or middling Wasps (or white gentiles) that were a ladder up for smart kids. (John McCloy a prototype). Now it's more or less understood that scholarships are meant for a different kind of diversity, and it's a far greater priority for good private schools to provide avenues for minorities than for white kids from Arkansas or Nebraska. So starting around, not sure when exactly, but the sixties probably, the WASP establishment was deprived, or deprived itself, of one of its traditional means of replenishment.
I remember in the late 80's I think he wrote an op-ed or something criticizing the Israeli crackdown of the intifada. Or something. Sid Zion attacked him for it, also in the Times. Woody has regressed since then, one of the few.
Kudos to Andrew Sullivan for linking to and posting Gideon Levy's moving article. I really wonder how long Americans can put up with this.
All societies need elites. It's better if the elites identify with their own society, not another one.
What an interesting piece. Good for Brandon, Princeton should be proud.
They need to get spit at more in Jerusalem.
I started thinking about this when one of the local zios launched into a “the PCUSA will be ‘sorry’ come fundraising time” spiel. It was such a strange statement, I couldn’t help but ask why?
This is funny. Does he imagine Zionist Jews fund the Presbyterians, sort of like the local library and museum? Or that rich Presbys will know better?
@Krauss-- profound and incisive post!
Woo Hoo!!!!
I used to think lack of scoring was a problem-- and obviously a 4-3 game would be more exciting than a 0-0 penalty kick thing. But there is a logic to making goal-scoring very difficult: it equalizes. How many games which are 3-0 at half-time would be exciting? None. And unlike baseball, there is no chance the weaker team would ever catch up.
Peretz is conflating love for Israel, which I think is mostly limited to Jews, with willingness to be an ally--by treaty possibly, with a Jewish state that has recognized borders and has made a fair peace with the Palestinians. I would support that kind of alliance, rather like we have with NATO countries.
But apart from that I credit him at least for ignoring the contemporary hasbara line, which holds that a majority of Americans are deeply and emotionally committed to Israel because of Judeo-Christian values or whatever. That's a lie, no matter how often it is repeated.
Really too much, your example---too good. If I could write fiction, even as parody, I would try. (Something about a fiction writing course in high school English, which I switched out of, convinced me otherwise.)
But recognize the LAT publishes more good stuff on this issue than any other big paper. If you're in the mainstream media business, you have tack with the wind a bit. Let Shimon spout some propaganda. Meh.
Paxton's comment (he is America's foremost expert on fascism, and almost universally respected as a prudent scholar, and no knee-jerk lefty) came to mind with that fascism remark.
I'm not sure he's accurate in assessing Israel's position. Some Israelis (eg Caroline Glick, on Capitol Hill last year) were explicit in explaining that Israel preferred Assad overthrown. Others I'm not so sure. There is an Israeli stream of thought that would prefer fundamentalist chaos 0r Gaza type rule in Syria to a fairly secular-Iran aligned regime.
Yes, saw the Times story --which naturally made no mention of the AIPAC subtext. But I did recall something about it from before. And it seems a surprising win, as half the district was Rothman's old one, Pascrell a crusty old and underfunded pol. Bravo Catholic get out the vote!
I love the "us" that Steiner uses in reference to Israel, as in "they gotta give the $2 billion to us." (in the marvelous transcript). And then squawk to high heaven about the "dual loyalty canard." And of course "Israel-firster" is an anti-Semitic term.
Annie, I think you're partly right and mostly wrong. But raising an interesting and important point. Frustrated that your footnote is to a movie about Edward Bernays, in that the thought footnoted deserves a more comprehensive footnote, or should be presented more comprehensively.
I think there is a pattern of gentile deference towards Jews, a sense that Jews lived more thoroughly in the century (defined by communism and fascism/Nazism) combined with a sense that people who grew up with a sunny nativist American sensibility had it too easy, by comparison. So a readiness to defer to what was perceived as deeper historical experience , (unwarranted, at least to the degree it occurred) is not the same as a fear of anti-semitism, though the results might be similar.
It really is an "Emperor's New Clothes" situation, in that your point seems to me hardly even debatable. And yet I can understand the fear of "stirring up" antisemitism which accounts for the reluctance to face facts. Which is why it's so important to be laser-like precise in identifying the problem, and what the problem is not.
On this topic, amused by this piece in the Forward, a conference on Jews and the Left, where a big complaint was the New Left's "anti-Zionism" :
A line running through the conference, from the papers of Cohen and Postone to Michael Walzer’s keynote lecture and Mendelsohn’s closing reminiscences, was the argument that future Jewish involvement in leftist politics would hinge on building another New Left, one more open to religion and spirituality, more defined by advocacy for social justice than by opposition to Zionism.
Read more: link to forward.com
Tomorrow night in front of the White House. I will wear black.
Great post, Phil Harris. I'm surprised an Israeli consul had enough self awareness for that thought experiment, at least in public. On my first read, I thought it was your rabbi. It means that (some in official) Israel knows they're doomed if they don't change something. Maybe they will, though the people in power now show little indication of it.
There are so many distinctions. Rape is a very serious crime. What of the gay prep school teacher who liked to try to tickle boys when they had lights out at 10:30? We used to make fun of him, kind of gently. It didn't seem that serious. He was a good English teacher, actually.
link to news.xinhuanet.com
Above the link to the story by the Chinese news service on the break in. I'm curious as to how much coverage this will get in the MSM. Even more so than evicting Palestinians from their homes or breaking up peaceful demonstrations, this strikes me as a nakedly fascist action, impossible to justify even by normal Israeli standards. And impossible to imagine that the PA could just let it slide, as if nothing happened. Obama is supposedly against settlements. Will he say anything?
Thanks for the tidbit about Bridget Loves Bernie, with the wry ending. Where did the "hate mail" come from. I believe I read recently that it was establishment Jewish pressure (and probably "disapproval" mail, not hate mail. But maybe hate mail also. It's kind of surprising, I think "mixed" relationships were pretty commonplace in the 60's--I had one for a year, and I don't think the subject ever came up. I would guess that my parents and the girls' parents may have talked about it among themselves (within their respective marriages) but it was a complete non-subject as far as Debbie from Phillie and I were concerned. It only seems somewhat interesting after the fact.
Rudoren's piece was spectacular for the Times; I don't remember anything there before which actually tried to let the reader understand what it might feel like to be Palestinian--though there was often some pro forma reporting or acknowledgment of the Palestinian "perspective." But wow, what a concept, two peoples here, struggling for justice and self-determination, not just one. Bravo Jodi.
They're claiming the Palestinian Christian population hasn't decreased?
My quick reaction is 1) it's not as if the votes had gone differently, it would have ended the occupation; it's all part of a long process. and 2) no one has paid so much attention to a mainline Protestant denomination in decades, and 3) everyone knows where the energy and spirit it is, and which way the wind is blowing.
How close were the votes? The one I saw earlier, about whether to support a minority (pro divest, as I understood it) resolution, failed by a kind of 50-47 score, very close. The subsequent ones?
I don't know how severe a defeat this is, or the extent to which the SQL's won a pyrrhic and not meaningful victory, or what it says about the Presbyterian vote later this summer (a smaller denomination than the Methodists, in any case).
A wet kiss for Sheldon
Agree with Pamela. People who move on this issue are all on different timetables. A decade ago, Palestine wasn't even on the radar of the rock and roll elite. I think it was about five years ago that Roger Waters first said something negative about the wall--while playing T-A. Now he's far more advanced.
It's really a Selma bridge moment. Cameras are important.
I cannot imagine it being published in the New York Times. A sad reflection on our discourse.
Or even on Peter Beinart's blog.
Annie, Watching the clip I had the feeling the newscaster was just ignorant. White power groups purposefully use civil rights style rhetoric to try to get a footing in the culture, and this woman just took it at face value. And why would any average American college grad know that National Socialist=Nazi? Would Sarah Palin? My bet it's dumb mistake, more than sinister Fox--not that they aren't sinister.
Meanwhile, Weir and friends at the “Council for the National Interest” joined with the John Birch Society (which has as its top legislative priority the disenfranchisement of millions of people of color in the US) to promote their organization.
I don't want to get deep in the weeds on this subject or defend the often kooky Birchers, but this is just false. A Bircher lady was Pat Buchanan's Reform Party veep choice in 2000. Ezola Foster. Look her up in google images.
I think Bob Simon did one or two quite good segments in the past year or so.
For example: link to newsbusters.org
As for attacking the editors of the publication that runs your stuff-- wow, that's a CLM (career-limiting move; Jim Cramer taught me that great line when he was at Goldman, Sachs; some guy was wearing loud ties)
Maybe he thinks he's Dwight Howard.
link to video.cinesport.com
Good catch. Phil’s on an ethnocentric streak today. First his smearing of the goys as golddiggers and now these sly comments.
I read that marriage money comment differently, as wrongfully dismissing the other qualities of marriageable Jewish men and women. It's been so long since I dated Jewish girls, I can't trust completely my memories, but I kind of think he's wrong. . . .
Hophmi,
Speaking for myself, but with a view I think shared by many others--I don't think that many people would be contemplating a non-Zionist or one state solution if there was a two-state solution. It's the failure of Israel to allow the second that opens the discourse to the possibility of the first. If Israel made an effort to end Palestinian statelessness--instead of the absurd denial that 1) its own actions had anything to do with creating it, and 2) denying the Palestinians are a people--I'd be happy to think about something else.
Gilad, I like Bill's comment above. Perhaps irony is the best response. But. . .
I was going to ask you, sincerely, do you really believe what you write? A couple of days ago I read in the Times a story about some Jewish from Milwaukee settlement woman, in Migron. She spouted all the Bible torah bs. But do you really believe she has "no other place to go?" She could come back to Milwaukee. She would probably have to be deprogrammed, but we would take her. She would do less damage to us here than there.
This is smart comment. One one of its side points, I was curious and went and looked up what Beinart said using W&M as a punching bag while defending himself from Bret Stephens. What he said I thought was not that terrible, under the circumstances, and given his audience : he denied using them as a source for one of his quotes, mentioned that he had publicly criticized them before (I'm not sure where) and mentioned that their book is widely loathed among Jews (regrettably true, a success of the Lobby's review tactics but not so in the broader intellectual culture).
Actually Beinart and W&M's perspective on the I/P problem strike me as more or less identical . . . I'm sure anyone reading the two books would conclude that, and I'm quite certain Beinart realizes it. Of course the two profs were directing their argument to Americans in general, and Beinart to American Jews and Zionists, but their take in the situation is the same. What Beinart said is quite not like Jeremy Ben Ami, who really did slur the two great ground-breaking professors.