-
-
- Backlash grows against surveillance targeting Muslims: Lawsuit and bills take … 1
- Report from Yemen: The innocent victims of the Obama drone … 0
- ‘Fuck it, I Love Israel’ — Artists 4 Israel bombards … 10
- Daily News and Foxman smear Alice Walker: ‘infected by anti-Semitism,’ … 27
- Slam poet Tahani Salah rips into ADC 2013 audience performing … 0
- Samantha Power’s character reference likens Palestinians to Nazis, deserving defeat 30
- ‘Your cause is our cause,’ Mohammed Assaf tells Palestinian prisoners 13
- New commuter station ad seeks to immunize Israel from racism … 9
-
- ‘Girls on Fire’ tell Alicia Keys — Don’t play Apartheid … 197
- Meet the Israeli-linked firm that sold Big Brother machines to … 99
- 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
- Looking for ‘a new devil,’ Israeli leaders and supporters left … 83
- World Bank, the PA and Israel work together to confiscate … 83
- 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
-
- Backlash grows against surveillance targeting Muslims: Lawsuit and bills take aim at NYPD http://t.co/cx0oNrygtc, 19 mins ago
- Report from Yemen: The innocent victims of the Obama drone wars http://t.co/RItqjlOFcg, 35 mins ago
- ‘Fuck it, I Love Israel’ — Artists 4 Israel bombards Ibiza with hasbara condoms http://t.co/KudmxgouZU, 48 mins ago
- New commuter station ad seeks to immunize Israel from racism charge http://t.co/HtWBJvo4gw, 3 hours ago
- ‘Your cause is our cause,’ Mohammed Assaf tells Palestinian prisoners http://t.co/NL8bYnhOhv, 4 hours ago
-
Recent Comments
click link to see last 100 comments- ‘Fuck it, I Love Israel’ — Artists 4 Israel bombards Ibiza with hasbara condoms (10)
- Ecru: Tacky, loony, narcissistic and ugly all in the same package. What a glorious example of Zionism this nut job...
- seafoid: Condoms are dangerous for Zionism. The Haredi don’use them so they are winning the jewish demographic...
- talknic: “Has anyone noticed that the Zionist cause is attracting more and more grifters?” And more...
- Daily News and Foxman smear Alice Walker: ‘infected by anti-Semitism,’ all but ‘a lunatic shouting anti-Semitic canards’ (27)
- Ecru: Your father was a very perceptive man.
- Nevada Ned: Can Alice Walker sue Abe Foxman for slander for claiming that she is “someone who is unabashedly...
- tokyobk: You’re inviting whataboutism. That is Foxman’s point about Syria. But ultimately its an...
- Backlash grows against surveillance targeting Muslims: Lawsuit and bills take aim at NYPD (1)
- Blownaway: Where is the NYPD and the outrage when two guys want to use x-ray’s to kill enemies of Israel?...
- Tough love from Clinton at a ‘left-leaning’ celeb party beats having anything to do with Palestinians (19)
- Inanna: I feel sorry for Israel. Bill Clinton is only saying these things to get the cool half million for his...
- Inanna: Why does he need to learn? Tony Blair’s position gives him access to all sorts of money-making schemes...
- Clif Brown: Isn’t all of the celebration par for the course for those powerful politicians who survive to old...
- ‘Fuck it, I Love Israel’ — Artists 4 Israel bombards Ibiza with hasbara condoms (10)
Our Writers
More WritersBlogroll
The War of Ideas in the Middle East
Speaking of avoiding subjects like the plague, giladg, in the "Breaking the Silence" thread you said that Israeli soldiers who committed the acts described in the videos were sent to jail if caught. I invited you to post links documenting that. I never heard back. I'm still interested.
Write your Senator, if you have not already done so.
In Finkelstein's case his faults are a mirror image of his virtues. But what a champion for justice he has been!
Thanks to MondoWeiss for posting this.
Wonderful, indeed. Good for her for doing the right thing here. We should think of her and the others who have joined her any time we have blanket negative thoughts about Israelis.
Annie, thanks for the overview. I'm curious - do you speak Arabic?
giladg, could you please post some links documenting cases where IDF soldiers were "sent to jail" for doing the things described in these videos?
By this idiotic logic, Egypt must be peppered with checkpoints making people wait for days and preventing pregnant women from getting to the hospital.
If only there were the same latitude for "intense and public scrutiny" of Israel in the public realm here.
The link to that interview is here. Fact is, I haven't been able to listen to Fresh Air since.
Phil, I don't think Terry Gross is a likely purveyor of enlightenment on this subject. I was heard her interview, or rather, mind meld with Jeffrey Goldberg on the subject of the Middle East a few years ago. They sounded totally oblivious to the possibility that anyone else might be listening.
Read the comments to the story. They're quite encouraging.
Lautenberg was dying. Perhaps under the circumstances he felt free to vote his conscience.
My mistake.
This is really too much.
Wikipedia states:
Estimates of the number of Palestinian Jews killed range from 91 to several hundred.
Your post is is a good example of a style of argument supporters of Israel use over and over. Untruths delivered with an air of effortless authority.
Rick Steves was rightly commended here last year for some courageous criticism he made of media coverage of I/P:
I've been duped
This current show sounds pretty lame, but my guess is that he was given very restrictive guidelines regarding what he could say on this trip. That is not a complete excuse, but the whole picture should be taken into account before condemning him. I'm a big fan of his show - he's anything but a stereotypical "obnoxious American tourist".
It gives me a frisson to post a link to Mondoweiss, since that what got me kicked off DailyKos a year or so ago.
Thanks for that notice, PTJ.
It sure does, but not in a way that flatters the conference.
hophmi, list one UNSC resolution that cites China for "acting illegally outside of its Internationally recognized sovereign extent". One resolution, that is, that applies to the situation today.
The UNSC resolutions citing Israel on just Israeli settlements in the occupied territories as a violation of the Geneva Convention include 446, 452, 465, etc, etc. These all apply to open issues.
The funniest aspect of this is that the conference Hawking has decided to boycott is not a scientific conference. It seems to be a hasbara fest. See the home page and schedule.
Oops!
That's hilarious. I guess the Americans had no business pulling out of the British Empire in 1776 - all of their manufactured goods came from Britain.
This is in character. In 2002, when Keller was angling for the managing editor job at the Times, he wrote one of the most sycophantic profiles I've ever read. It was about Paul Wolfowitz , arch-promoter of the invasion of Iraq:
I thought to myself "He's got the job". And he did.
Regarding this:
The only reason that it should "take a lot of courage for the Times to publish it" is that the Times itself has worked so hard over decades to tell Americans a very distorted story.
It's really not surprising that there has been almost no media followup to Ehrenreich's piece - that is the typical response to any important piece of information that disturbingly contradicts the official line. Look at the near-silence that greeted the news that the 911 bombers were motivated in large part by US support of Israel.
It's also not surprising that Ben Ehrenreich is the daughter of Barbara - two excellent journalists with a strong moral sense.
I just finished this book. The accolades are deserved. It primarily describes her personal life in Palestine, the people she knew (Israeli, Palestinian and other), and the difficulties of living there. It does not go much into history.
It's biggest virtue for American readers is the way it vividly humanizes Palestinians. One small example that took me by surprise: "I'd never heard anything as infectiously shoulder-shakingly danceable as Arabic pop music".
It looks that way to me, too.
I agree! While I tend towards righteous sanctimony myself, I know it's a good thing to be able to see things from more than one point of view.
Excellent link.
Something I've been waiting for from Hedges is a detailed account of how I/P news was edited at the NYT. I suspect he has stories to tell. However, he's probably bound by contract.
How I/P news is edited across the media spectrum is something I'd like to hear much more about. It's a bit much to expect that new Columbia Journalism Review editor Steve Coll will address this immediately. He was, after all, managing editor at WaPo during the Iraq invasion. However, it would be wonderful if someone would undertake to tell this story. It would have to be a brave person.
That's funny. Why would you think that? I know plenty of Catholics, and I can't think of one who would make such an association.
Actually, Phil, the NY Times regularly treats Israel as though it were an all-Jewish country.
I thought of this a few days ago when I read the following article by Jodi Rudoren:
Many Israelis Unsure of Obama, but Are Ready to Listen During Visit
The article starts with "Obama administration officials have made it clear that the top agenda item for the president’s visit here this week is to win the hearts of the Israeli people. He has a lot of work to do. . . ". Rudoren goes on to interview about a dozen Jewish Israelis about their views.
Clearly Rudoren doesn't consider Palestinian citizens of Israel to be part of "the people of Israel". The fact is, neither does anyone else. Whenever the unqualified term "Israeli" is used, whether in Israel or here, by Jews or non-Jews, it doesn't include the 24% of the population of Israel that's Palestinian.
This fact alone gives the lie to the propaganda meme of Israel as a multi-ethnic secular democracy where all citizens are equal.
Sorry, but I can't agree with this. The Times' editorial page has been an indispensable support to Israel for decades. It appears to be accommodating to Palestinian aspirations, which makes it seem more serious than Fox News. However, overall its editorial content is no more fair or balanced than its news coverage. How often do you see an editorial or Op/Ed that points that all settlement activity since 1967 is illegal? When do you ever see a call for tangible pressure by the US government on Israel? The Times' faux reasonableness simply makes its bellwether standing more dangerous.
So during the run-up to war (it was obvious long before the beginning) you had hidden in plain sight the massive role (notably OSP) of quasi Israeli/Likud/Eretz Israel operatives (the redactors of the Clean Break Report) high up in the Bush administration and this was never tackled in the mainstream media . . . You had to read people like Raimondo, Bill and Kathleen Christison, Pat Buchanan, some Counterpunch articles or the aggregator “Cursor”.
Excellent post. This is so true. I'd add Jim Lobe to that list, and that's about it.
One very interesting aspect of this affair is the light it sheds on Israeli military censorship.
Israeli military censors have total purview over what may be published or aired on subjects touching national security. This works via prior restraint; all articles must be reviewed by censors before being published.
In the past this has actually been used to erase swathes of history. Thanks to Israeli censorship, during much of Israel's history the story put out by Israeli propagandists that Palestinian refugees left their homes voluntarily was widely believed in the West, hard as that is to believe now. For example, for decades censors did not permit anyone to publish a reference to the 1948 overnight expulsion at gunpoint of tens of thousands of Palestinian civilians from the towns of Ramleh and Lydda by the Haganah, precursor to the IDF. It wasn't until a censored portion of Yitzhak Rabin's autobiography was leaked to the West in 1979 that this fact was revealed. Of course, Palestinians had been saying it for years, but who listened to them?
This subject is predictably largely ignored by US media. It doesn't mesh with the fable of a "vibrant democracy" that is "just like us".
The NY Times story on this is a piece of work. It does not mention the very longstanding and universal international opposition to settlements on legal grounds. It doesn't mention that (AFAIK) the official US position based on prior US votes in the UNSC is that all settlements violate the Geneva Convention. It basically blandly frames the issue as one on which reasonable people can disagree. Finally, the story is poorly placed.
In contrast, the Guardian posts its story much further up, and forthrightly points out this reality:
"The UNHRC report broadly restated international consensus on the illegality of Israeli settlements."
Has it come to this? A mere cut in aid is the "helicopter on the roof" moment?
It used to be that the US not only sometimes declined to use it's UNSC veto to support Israel, but actually joined in votes to condemn Israeli actions. As far as I know, Israel didn't regard this as a sign that the US had become and enemy or was abandoning it for good.
I think it's hard for anyone under the age of 60 to realize how far the US has moved towards total support of Israel over the years, how much more empowered supporters of Israel are now than ever, and how impoverished the discourse on I/P has become, particularly since 9/11.
Yonah, perhaps you should not dwell so much on history and look at the present. I was raised as a Protestant, and had several Protestant clergymen and women in my extended family. Based on my experience, the notion that Christianity still broadly considers that Jews inherited the guilt of killing Jesus is completely wrong. No major denomination, Catholic or Protestant (BTW, Catholics are also Christian) considers this to be true. That student in North Carolina was very much an outlier, not a typical Christian.
Personally I have never - not once - heard this opinion expressed by a Christian of any denomination, and I have two cousins who are fundamentalists. The tradition I was raised in was philosemitic.
You should get out more.
I hope you're teasing Mooser here.
Mooser, Judaism is an ideology or system of thought, just like Zionism. Are you saying that Judaism should be outside the realm of scrutiny?
Please note that I am not saying that Judaism "inextricably lead(s) to ... violence and crime". I'm not saying that it would be judicious for Phil to plunge into an extended discussion of this issue here. However, I do believe that there are threads in Judaism that support the exclusivity and double standards of Zionism. I don't think one can fully understand Israeli behavior without understanding that.
I think it's a very, very bad idea to reduce any religion to its less attractive aspects. But Judaism, like Christianity or Islam, should be open to critique.
Those who constantly criticize Israel's value as an ally must acknowledge that once again Israel has heroically stood by the US on an issue on which we stand almost alone. How many times over the decades has little Israel come to our defense in the UN on this issue? Almost too many to count.
Of course, mention also must be made of Canada, the Czech Republic, the Marshall Islands, Micronesia, Nauru, Palau and Panama. These are nations whose devotion to principle is unquestioned.
How disappointing that the NY Times has chosen to downplay this story! This only makes the accusations that the Times is hyper-critical of Israel more credible.
Bruce, that is a wonderful post. It would be helpful if all of us who get angry with the power of the Israel lobby keep this in mind.
At the same time, there is no mistaking that what some Jews believe about Jewishness has a powerful effect on their behavior vis a vis Israel. When Elliot Abrams, a former National Security Council Senior Director for Near East and North African Affairs says "Jews are in a permanent covenant with God and with the land of Israel and its people. Their commitment will not weaken if the Israeli government pursues unpopular policies", this is rooted in his view of Judaism . Jewish religious and cultural tropes can affect all of us that way. In any genuine conversation they must be must be subject to open criticism. We seldom have an honest conversation, which is why, scandalously, Abrams' opinion expressed above has not been the subject of public debate, considering his public power and responsibilities.
In his forward to Israel Shahak's Jewish History, Jewish Religion, Edward Said said that understanding the religious and cultural beliefs of Jewish Israelis was essential to understanding Israeli policies. I believe that is completely true, and it also can apply in cases to American supporters of Israel. (Caution - this book is dangerous if taken as a determinist view of how Jews think).
A recent AJC survey said that 71% of American Jews agreed with the statement "Caring about Israel is a very important part of my being a Jew". I must admit that I think of this whenever I hear of a Jew being appointed to an key national security position, or making a large political donation. This is an issue that powerfully affects the whole country, and must be discussed.
At the same time, Bruce, your point that Jews have all kinds of opinions, and that the Jewish Lobby whose organizations seanmcbride enumerates tends to represent the most pro-Israeli Jews, must always be kept in mind. It's a big canvas. We're all on it together.
Oh. Thought he was serious.
Mooser, do you still feel the same about my post, given my response ?
Irishmoses, this statement:
an accurate factual basis for a generalization can still be used in ways that raise questions about the motive and ethics of the one making the generalization.
is both somewhat questionable and one that cuts both ways. First, it is hard to know for sure what someone else's motive are. Very few of us can actually see another person's mind. Just as is the case with generalizations, we inevitably make judgements about motive, but one should attempt to look at all sides and all possibilities before doing so.
Second, the motives of the questioner are subject to the same rule.
I've been around this issue for so long that I know that whenever someone is an effective critic of Israel, sooner or later that person will be accused of being antisemitic, or "following antisemitic tropes" or something. This is almost as predictable as night following day. My tendency is to reject those attacks, though as this case shows this can sometimes, though rarely, be shown to be mistaken.
I'm not familiar with Joachim Martillo. I did agree with the statement I quoted for the reasons I gave.
My "link" with him is via that one statement. Don't make it into more than that.
American, by definition all generalization have exceptions. But we cannot avoid using them. Everyone except God finds them necessary.
irishmoses, suppose that the conclusion drawn from the 71% in that poll is not "American Jews are traitors", but deep concern about the effect that such a high percentage of money donated to national political campaigns comes from Jewish donors could have on US policies?
Terrific post, Bekah. The extensive detail you provided has changed my mind about this affair.
I wholeheartedly agree with your main point - that antisemitism is unacceptable. We must not accept it regardless of the source. Having seen many defenders of Palestinian rights silenced by untrue accusations of antisemitism, I simply took Greta Berlin's explanation at face value.
At the same time, there is a further point that should be made. You single out Joachim Martillo for his response to the statement "We must never never generalize about Jews and Zionist Jews". In his response he says "In truth we should generalize, and there are perfectly reasonable wa(y)s to generalize about ethnic groups, cultures, and societies". What he goes on to say is not very reasonable, and perhaps that's what you meant to condemn. However, the first point he makes is quite true. Discussion of history or current events becomes absurd if we can't generalize about "ethnic groups, cultures, and societies". The different characteristics among groups are what make them, well, "groups". Imagine where the presidential race would be without that.
The idea that we must "never never generalize" is too often used to make discussion of certain American realities impossible. According to a recent AJC poll, 71% of American Jews agree with the statement "Caring about Israel is a very important part of my being a Jew". What follows from this attitude has a tangible effect on all of us. Yet in many forums any attempt to discuss the implications of this fact without multiple, constant qualifications and disclaimers could get you kicked off the site. This situation is effect of Jewish power in our society - another reality that affects us all, but unfortunately can't be safely discussed in public.
It should be possible to discuss differences among groups and individuals. The key to protecting your own mind while doing this is not to freeze differences into permanent realities, or assign a particular character to people simply because of their ethnic backgrounds.
Do you ever think before you type?
You just started your own "disinformation campaign using antisemitism as cover" right here.
This is the most tried and true tactic used by supporters of Israel to smear opponents. And the most reprehensible.
Yes, I think the original post should be amended to include Greta Berlin's explanation that “Zionists Ran the Holocaust and the Concentration Camps” was intended to be an example of bad propaganda. See HHM's post below.
So it appears that Greta Berlin's intended point was exactly the opposite of how it was interpreted by the former Free Gaza board members. Her purpose was to present “Zionists Ran the Holocaust and the Concentration Camps” as an example of example of propaganda to be avoided.
IMO Ali Abuminah can be quick on the trigger with anti-antisemitism accusations.
That isn't all.
Israel desperately wanted Jews to leave Arab states and come to Israel. They were needed to fill the empty lands left by the departed Palestinians, and prevent the Palestinians from realizing the right of return promised by the UN.
Israel made great efforts to make this happen, including recruiting native Jews to make terrorist provocations in Arab countries. This definitely happened in Egypt, and has been alleged to have happened in Iraq. But beyond that, there was a tremendous public relations campaign.
That is not to say that there weren't injustices committed both by Arab governments and private citizens. However, there is a vivid contrast between Palestinian and Jewish refugees. Israel really wanted the former to leave, and the latter to come.
Having said that, the opinion piece itself didn’t strike me as particularly lop-sided toward Israel.
Just keeping the meme of potential war with Iran constantly in the news is a big win for those who want war.
The issue has never been stated more clearly than Woodward does here.
Because:
1) Due to our total support of Israel, the US is partly responsible for Israel's crimes.
2) That puts at risk in large areas around the world.
Now take a hike, troll.
Phil, good luck to you.
I think you have a point.
This:
"Most American Jews, quite to the contrary, believe that Judaism is a religion, not a nationality. "
doesn't reflect my experience. Among the many buddhists of Jewish background whom I know, continued strong self-identification as Jews is the rule rather than the exception. Among the few I know who are actively involved in the I/P issue, while there is a strong desire to make things better and a recognition of problems in Israel, there is also an obvious strong identification with Israel.
Also, regarding this:
"American Jewish leaders-----who,in fact, represent no one but themselves----have turned their backs on Judaism's universal moral and ethical values."
An AJC poll conducted two years ago found that 69% of American Jews felt "close" or "very close" to Israel. This suggests that American Jewish leaders actually reflect American Jewish opinion more than not.
It's important not to sugarcoat reality.
This is nice to see. I'll be happy when this kind of defense is regularly offered for "little people" who are not celebrity columnists, such as California students advocating BDS. But it's a start.
All too true.
While Christians do constitute a community, there is nothing in the teachings of Christ that enjoin a Christian to treat someone differently because of their faith. The two-tier morality found in Judaism is not found in Christianity.
Beryl Satter's post is wrong on a number of levels. The worst thing about it is that while purporting to help critics of Israel defend themselves against generalized charges of antisemitism, it actually endorses the false basis of such charges.
For example:
I do believe, however, that anti-Semitic discourse exists. It is deeply embedded in Christian culture
and:
Anti-Semitism is a 2000-year-old ideology that sees Jews . . . as killers of the son of God and of Christian babies.
I grew up in the 1950s and 60s in an extended family that was, to say the least, active in mainline Protestant denominations. During my childhood I can't recall ever hearing a single negative generalization about Jews either in my family or in church. To the contrary, philosemitism was the order of the day. Jews were mainly liberal Democrats, which was good. Beyond that they had suffered terribly and there was strong empathy for that. My two cousins, sons of a UCC pastor, lived on kibbutzes during the summer.
I personally recall experiencing just one examples of antisemitism growing up. It was during a pickup baseball game in seventh grade. There was a close play, and a fierce argument broke out. One of the players, at his wit's end, said to his antagonist "You, you . . . Jew!". My impression at the time was of incongruity. What did the fact that Weiss was Jewish have to do with whether he was safe at first?
How, exactly, did my Christian upbringing contribute to "deeply embedded" antisemitism? It didn't. There wasn't any. Christians who support Palestinian rights come overwhelmingly from backgrounds similar to mine. Bigoted Christians are far more likely to be supporters of Israel.
Ms Satter, if this antisemitism was in the atmosphere, where exactly was it? Where was it in popular culture? Where was it in political discourse?
A second disturbing aspect of this post is the attempt to put strict boundaries on what may or may not be discussed. For example, this:
Anti-Semitism . . . sees Jews as master manipulators who control global finance, communism, and the media.
This statement preempts any investigation of a very important source of potential bias, which is the effect of Jewish ownership, management on reporting on the Middle East. For example, what might AM Rosenthal's strong pro-Israeli opinions as a columnist suggest about his influence on the NY Times' reporting on the Middle East when he ran that paper? Maybe nothing. But I suspect nobody has the courage to look, because they're assured of being blasted as antisemites, with Ms Satter's implicit support. There are many, many other examples.
Then there is the "double standards" argument:
The fact that amassing evidence against Israel cannot fully free one from charges of anti-Semitism might seem unfair to activists who, for whatever reason, are concerned with oppressive acts by Israel and not with similarly oppressive acts by other states. . . .. . . A call for consistency is not too much to ask.
Why don't we spend the same amount of time criticizing North Korea as we do Israel? The obvious answer to that is that the US has a unique relationship with Israel. Israeli actions affect the US in a way that North Korean actions do not. One example of this that has been extremely underplayed by the media is the fact that the planners and participants of the 911 attacks were motivated in part by US support for Israel. Also, as Americans we actually are partly responsible for Israeli actions, thanks to our government's constant support of Israel. This is a moral issue.
In short, Beryl Satters' advice here constitutes support for further unfounded charges of antisemitism, rather than the reverse. I hope she considers this carefully.
First they came for the Muslims
No, first they came for the Palestinians, who were both Christian and Muslim. Historically a Palestinian's faith has made little difference in Israel's treatment, nor in Palestinian resistance. It's an avidly propagated Israeli propaganda meme to say otherwise.
Shouldn't the Times have to state that Brookings is funded by Indyk's good friend Haim Saban, a former Israeli who is an ardent supporter of Israel? Shouldn't it state that the Washington Institute for Near East Policy, which was spun off by AIPAC, is widely seen as ferociously pro-Israel?
Indyk founded WINEP.
One more thing should be said about Judith Butler's statement. The level of discourse in the thread is high. It contains far fewer rote responses and less personal slagging than most. I think this is due to the standard Butler set.
Times, and ethical standards, have changed. Would you justify keeping slaves now by pointing out that Americans had slaves 150 years ago?
Well said.
What you say is completely true, yet I can't fault Butler for rooting her argument in the ethical framework with which she identifies. She is, after all, addressing other Jews.
You’re talking about a public venue and an anonymous general admission audience. That is a case of discrimination on the basis of nationality, because the exact cultural views of the audience are at best unknown or irrelevant.
By this standard, artistic boycotts of any state, including Nazi Germany or apartheid South Africa, would be illegitimate, since one never knows what views are held by each individual member of the audience. Is that what you're saying?
I come late to this discussion, but boy, is this good. Professor Butler's statement is bookmark-worthy, which is something rarely seen in a blog. Phil, as far as I'm concerned you've justified the site with this one post.
True, but makes it hard to carry on a conversation.
They're up now, thanks.
Could someone at Mondoweiss please tell me why the two comments I posted this morning have been "awaiting moderation" all day, one since 8:39 AM?
If they violate your policy please tell me how. If you simply don't like my face, please tell me why. This isn't the first time it's happened, nor the first time I've asked for an explanation.
Thank you.