Trending Topics:

Hotel Rwanda at Cooper Union

Israel/PalestineUS Politics
on 57 Comments

This is part of Marc H. Ellis’s “Exile and the Prophetic” feature for Mondoweiss. To read the entire series visit the archive page.

It’s getting scarier, scandalous really, with Netanyahu in town once again.

I remember when progressive Jews were certain that Ariel Sharon would never become Prime Minister.  Why?  Because Israel’s Jewish ethical center would hold.  Then when the Wall was being built those in the know were sure that mainstream Jews and the international community would halt the Wall.  Why?  Because Israel’s injustice had become too obvious.

We’ve come a long way since those days.

Only one person has served longer than Netanyahu as Israel’s prime minister – Israel’s founding father, David Ben-Gurion.  Coming from different political perspectives, Netanyahu and Ben-Gurion make a strange or complementary pair depending on how one understands the history – and future – of Israel.

Netanyahu spends Monday in Washington and Tuesday at the United Nations.  What I am thinking about this morning, though, is the Paul Kagame/Elie Wiesel love fest at Cooper Union tonight.  Amazing stuff when the doyen of Holocaust remembrance links up with the controversial and increasingly criticized Rwandan strongman.

Paul Rusesabagina (Photo via KPFA)

Paul Rusesabagina (Photo via KPFA)

Like Netanyahu, Kagame is here for the United Nations.  The 20th anniversary of the Rwandan genocide has arrived.  As with Ben-Gurion and Netanyahu, Netanyahu, Wiesel and Kagame make strange bedfellows.  At least, I would like to think so, especially when Holocaust and genocide are on the table.  However, increasingly it seems just the opposite.  The three are natural allies in subterfuge and enabling violence.

Who will break this alliance?  Such a break would be good for everyone, including the victims of the Holocaust and the Rwandan genocide.  Hotel Rwanda’s Paul Rusesabagina has posted an open letter challenging Wiesel’s and Kagame’s joint appearance.

Below are excerpts from his letter.  They read as a wake-up call for those who seek to remember both the Jewish and Rwandan experience of mass death:

As a Rwandan genocide survivor, I was very disturbed to hear that the Jewish Values Network is providing a forum for Rwandan President Paul Kagame to polish his image and tell more lies to the international community. My foundation and I were even more surprised to see that Elie Wiesel would agree to serve on a panel with Kagame.

We love Elie Wiesel and his work very much. He is a genocide survivor, a great humanitarian, and a well-deserved Nobel Laureate. That being the case, we simply don’t want to see him sitting next to someone with so much blood on his hands. I have met Mr. Wiesel on a number of occasions, and in November of 2011 I was very pleased to receive the Lantos Human Rights Prize, which Elie Wiesel was awarded in 2010. It was an incredible honor to win an award that he had also received.

But now, a man that the entire world respects has been caught in a fishing net by Kagame’s public relations machine. It would be a terrible shame to see Elie Wiesel sitting at the same panel with someone accused by the international community of having killed hundreds of thousands of people in Rwanda’s neighbor, the Democratic Republic of the Congo. These are innocent civilians killed, the elderly, children and the sick, not just “rebel” soldiers.

Since leading a civil war against the Rwandan government from 1990-1994, a mountain of evidence continues to accumulate that Kagame and his forces have been involved in war crimes and crimes against humanity both in Rwanda during that civil war, and now in the neighboring Congo. In the Congo, the 2010 United Nations Mapping Report even states that there is enough evidence to investigate whether the Rwandan government committed genocide against Hutu civilians there. Atrocities continue on a daily basis, with UN and other international reports making it clear that the Rwandan government supports and controls the M23 militia group that is driving the violence, recruiting child soldiers, killing enormous numbers of civilians, and raping women and children daily in the Kivu region.

                                                      ——————————-

When we first saw the ad for this event, we thought “wow, it’s a bad idea for anyone to debate Elie Wiesel on genocide. I wonder why Kagame would do that?” But then we read deeper, and realized the terrible irony of this panel.

It would be a terrible shame to see Elie Wiesel sitting at the same panel with someone who has so much blood on his hands. And it would be an equal disgrace for highly respected Jewish organizations like the NYU Bronfman Center and the Jewish Values Network to allow Kagame a forum to spread his false tale. My understanding was that your organizations stand for justice and stopping violence. Kagame simply stands for impunity and doing whatever it takes to stay in power.

Paul Kagame is a violent dictator who should be on trial for his actions, not celebrated for them. The idea that he can sit with Elie Wiesel and discuss how to protect the weak should be a very bad joke, but it appears that it is instead a bad and embarrassing mistake about to happen.

Obviously Rusesabagina and Kagame have a thing going between them.  It turns out that Jews aren’t the only ones with a disputed history.

Rusesabagina plea is eloquent – tinged with innocence.  After all, it is Wiesel who is the elder Holocaust statesman, the man who taught the world, including many in Rwanda, how to commemorate mass death.

As a survivor, Rusesabagina has difficulty wrapping his mind around the naiveté of his friend, Elie Wiesel.  But, then, Rusesabagina may need to adjust his view of Wiesel.  Wiesel has been mostly silent on the suffering of Palestinians.  It would surprise everyone if he put gloves on and fought Kagame tonight.

Empowered victims and those who speak for them often take the mantle of suffering and do what they want with it without being brought to account.  Imperial Jewishness has no problem with being unaccountable.  Imperial Jewishness insists on it.  Imperial Rwanda is same.  That’s why some see Rwanda as the Israel of Africa.

The ostensible connection tonight – Holocaust, the Rwandan genocide and the use of chemical weapons in Syria – is the stretch of stretches.  Over the last few weeks, the Russian-American-United Nations negotiations on Syria and President Rouhani’s posture on Iran’s nuclear policy and the Holocaust has changed the highly charged political landscape to a considerable degree.

So the air might be out of the Cooper Union Holocaust/Genocide/Syria tire.  Or will the assembled panel that includes other purveyors of violence like Sheldon Adelson compromise further those who died in the Holocaust and the Rwandan genocide?

Marc H. Ellis
About Marc H. Ellis

Marc H. Ellis is Professor of History and Jewish Studies and Director of the Center for the Study of the Global Prophetic. His latest book is Finding Our Voice: Embodying the Prophetic and Other Misadventures.

Other posts by .


Posted In:

57 Responses

  1. American
    American
    September 29, 2013, 2:27 pm

    Hotel Rwanda is wrong, Wiesel will fit right in…he’s a con man, Jewish supremist and moral hypocrite. The holocaust has probably created more profitable careers and phony moralist than any other event in history.

    Wiesel he withdrew from his role as chair of the International Conference on the Holocaust and Genocide, and made efforts to abort the conference, in deference to Israeli objection to the inclusion of sessions on the Armenian genocide.

    On April 18, 2010 in The New York Times and on 16 April for three other newspapers, Wiesel wrote a full-page advertisement in which he emphasized the Jewish connection to Jerusalem and criticized the Obama administration for pressuring Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu to halt East Jerusalem Israeli settlement construction. He said that: “For me, the Jew that I am, Jerusalem is above politics. It is mentioned more than six hundred times in Scripture — and not a single time in the Koran.”

    http://www.thenation.com/article/wiesel-words

    Wiesel Words
    by Christopher Hitchens

    Is there a more contemptible poseur and windbag than Elie Wiesel? I suppose there may be. But not, surely, a poseur and windbag who receives (and takes as his due) such grotesque deference on moral questions.

    Christopher Hitchens
    February 1, 2001
    Is there a more contemptible poseur and windbag than Elie Wiesel? I suppose there may be. But not, surely, a poseur and windbag who receives (and takes as his due) such grotesque deference on moral questions. Look, if you will, at his essay on Jerusalem in the New York Times of January 24.
    “”As a Jew living in the United States, I have long denied myself the right to intervene in Israel’s internal debates…. My critics have their conception of social and individual ethics; I have mine. But while I grant them their right to criticize, they sometimes deny mine to abstain.

    Such magnificent condescension, to grant his critics the right. And it is not certain from when Wiesel dates his high-minded abstention from Israel’s internal affairs; he was a member of Menachem Begin’s Irgun in the 1940s, when that force employed extreme violence against Arab civilians and was more than ready to use it against Jews…….”

    • Walid
      Walid
      September 29, 2013, 11:37 pm

      “Is there a more contemptible poseur and windbag than Elie Wiesel?”
      (Christopher Hitchens)

      Yes, Bernard-Henri Lévy.

      • RoHa
        RoHa
        September 30, 2013, 1:11 am

        Oooooh! I’d say it’s a tough call, Walid.

  2. pabelmont
    pabelmont
    September 29, 2013, 2:31 pm

    Many men who lack character and values “wrap themselves in the flag.” People like Wiesel wrap themselves in The Holocaust ™. People who wrap themselves in deceptive costumes seem to enjoy relaxing in the company of others who do the same — and to dislike having to answer to people who wrap themselves in straightforward costumes, people who are themselves, who wear their values on their sleeves and act accordingly.

    “Never Again” ™ means “we win, now and forever”. for some Rwandans, the lesson is the same, it appears.

  3. eljay
    eljay
    September 29, 2013, 3:33 pm

    >> But now, a man that the entire world respects has been caught in a fishing net by Kagame’s public relations machine.

    Mr. Wiesel is self-serving, a Zio-supremacist and a hypocrite. I don’t respect him.

    • ritzl
      ritzl
      September 29, 2013, 4:34 pm

      Yeah, despte all his moral unassailability, Rusesabagina still portrays Wiesel as the naive waif in all this. Maybe R believes that. Maybe W is willing to do anything for Israel, without questions (i.e. remain willfully ignorant), and Israel simply takes advantage of that kind, convenient, blank/erasable/reusable state of being. Can one survive a genocide and remain naive? Doubt it.

      I think it’s more that Kagame was being used to provide calculated, recent-memory name-recognition, surface-only, genocide-victim commonality cover for Israel. BY Wiesel. Wiesel is the go-to guy for that kind of dishonest/questionable Israeli “outreach” (Christian Zios, no problem). Who’s going to challenge his credentials.

      • Walid
        Walid
        September 30, 2013, 12:08 am

        “… despite all his moral unassailability, Rusesabagina still…”

        Ritzl, don’t be hasty in joining Marc in beatifying the not so spic-and-span Paul Rusesabagina. He may not be as slimy as Kagame, but he too appears to be carrying some dubious personal baggage and is using this platform to get at his old foe by milking it along with Wiesel’s phony credentials.

      • ritzl
        ritzl
        September 30, 2013, 9:41 pm

        @Walid If you mean R was a Hutu that had dealings with the Hutus that perpetrated the genocide and Euros that did little or nothing about it, true enough. But he traded on that status to shield ~1000 Tutsis in his care. That situation may make R’s overall behavior seem morally ambiguous, but not to me. A la Schindler.

        I’ll do more reading. Peace…

      • Walid
        Walid
        September 30, 2013, 11:48 pm

        Hi ritzl, the guy’s family background is of a H&T mixture; it’s about a lot of smoke having been raised on how he had turned the 1200 T he had hidden was turned into a profit-generating enterprise. Being subsequently declared a hero and decorated for it by Bush Jr made me think it was highly probable.

      • Walid
        Walid
        October 1, 2013, 12:55 am

        Ritzl, Rusesabagina going on and on about how much of a great guy is Wiesel is telling what he’s all about.

        From HuffPo in 2011 about Canadian General Romeo Dallaire that was in Rwanda in 1994 in charge of the UN peacekeeping force, today a senator; at the time in 1994, Dallaire screamed his head off on the massacres happening in Rwanda but nobody listened:

        … When Dallaire spoke to us at a We Day youth rally in Waterloo last month, Paul Rusesabagina, the inspiration for the protagonist of “Hotel Rwanda,” played by Don Cheadle, had just cancelled his own appearance at Winnipeg’s We Day event later that month. Rusesabagina’s withdrawal came on the heels of protests over his receiving the Lantos Foundation for Human Rights and Justice Award, an honour that had previously gone to the likes of the Dalai Lama and holocaust survivor Ellie Wiesel. While the 2004 film painted Rusesabagina as the savior or more than 1,200 people who escaped certain death at the UN-protected Hôtel des Mille Collines, Rwandan groups have since accused him of revisionist history, genocide denial and profiteering off the refugees he sheltered.

        The Toronto Sun reported that the the Rwandese Canadian Association of Greater Toronto had asked the government to not issue Rusesabagina a visa to attend the We Day event, even alleging in a letter that “he charged refugees to stay in the hotel. Failure to pay, you would be let out of the fence and meet your death by militia.”

        Though Dallaire declined to address the Rusesabagina controversy directly — aside from saying it was very good he cancelled or “I wouldn’t be here” — he had no qualms about attacking “Hotel Rwanda.”

        “The story is skewed and we didn’t need that. Philip Gourevitch wrote an excellent book (‘We Wish To Inform You That Tomorrow We Will Be Killed With Our Families’) from which they extracted him, but I think that the facts were not necessarily well-researched,” he said, albeit adding that the film’s revisionism could also be useful.

        “That is very helpful: to realize that some people may want to be revisionist; some people may want to change what was written. Remember there was a big hoopla about the Japanese teaching the history of World War II and pre-World War II. Fiddling with the books. Well, I think it’s absolutely essential that people realize that some people are fiddling with the books and passing themselves on as an authority. So it’s all the more (important) that we are aware and that we study and that we comprehend what’s happening.”

        http://www.huffingtonpost.ca/2011/12/29/romeo-dallaire-hotel-rwanda_n_1174607.html

      • ritzl
        ritzl
        October 1, 2013, 4:59 pm

        Walid, I don’t want to stray too much OT, but that HP-CA article doesn’t provide any evidence of R’s wrongdoing. It decries the fact that people profited from the movie, but yet couched that in terms of increased awareness. The movie changed/dramatized details about the events at Milles Collines, de-emphasizing the role Dellaire played in saving people. All true.

        I found articles that said Rusesabagina bought a “posh home” in Texas and that he was arrested in Belgium at the insistence of the Rwandan government, for donating “thousands of dollars” to the anti-Kagame rebels (http://www.ippmedia.com/frontend/index.php?l=30545). R has a long “feud” (origin unknown) with Kagame and there is anti-R sentiment in some pro-government parts of the Rwandan disapora (http://allafrica.com/stories/201201310581.html).

        I respect your sensitivities, so I do understand that a, perhaps the, distasteful element in all this is that R does seem to politicize “his” genocide, contrary to the “truth and reconciliation” statements on his Foundation website (http://hrrfoundation.org/aboutthefoundation). In that sense he and Wiesel do seem to share a similar affinity/blind spot/character flaw.

        I’m not sure any of this changes the significance of Rusesabagina’s singular act of unfathomable courage. Actually, I am sure. It doesn’t.

        PS, Maybe more on topic, all this extra reading at your insistence does raise more questions about this perverse triumvirate of Wiesel-Kagame-Rusesabagina. How can R’s hero W hold court with R’s arch-enemy K and still be R’s hero? How is it anything but terminal hypocrisy for W to embrace both R and K? A fight for the right to exploit “Brand Rwanda?”

      • Walid
        Walid
        October 1, 2013, 6:29 pm

        Ritzl, at this point I don’t kmow much more than you do; we appear to have landed on the same articles that raised some doubts, but nothing concrete as you said. The same could be said of Kagame and his alleged involvement in the Congo and his dubious dealings with the Americans. I haven’t seen anything concrete about Kagame either and its evident that there is something serious between him and Rusesabagina but again as you have noted, the common tie between them, Wiesel, makes the 3 of them suspect. I’m always leery of people that make a living out of lecture tours that disparage others. Examples are the Arabs Sultan, Gabriel and Shoebat that make a living touring the US telling Jews how bad are the Arabs.

  4. Walid
    Walid
    September 29, 2013, 4:47 pm

    Rusesabagina, Kagame, Wiesel are all milking the situation and each other. They are all in the same notorious league.

  5. DICKERSON3870
    DICKERSON3870
    September 29, 2013, 5:05 pm

    RE: “My foundation and I were even more surprised to see that Elie Wiesel would agree to serve on a panel with Kagame.” ~ Rusesabagina

    MY COMMENT: I certainly wasn’t! ! ! *

    * FROM ELIE WIESEL (letter published in the Washington Post back in April of 2010):

    [EXCERPTS] . . . For me, the Jew that I am, Jerusalem is above politics. . .
    . . . It is important to remember: had Jordan not Joined Egypt and Syria in the 1967 war against Israel, the old city of Jerusalem would still be Arab.
    Clearly, while Jews were ready to die for Jerusalem they would not kill for Jerusalem.
    Today, for the first time in history Jews, Christlans and Muslims all may freely worship at their shrines. And, contrary to certain media reports, Jews, Christians and Muslims ARE allowed to build their homes anywhere In city. . .

    SOURCE – http://www.politico.com/static/PPM41_elie_wiesel_ad.html

    * ALSO SEE: An open letter to Elie Wiesel from activists from the Sheikh Jarrah movement in response to the letter Wiesel published in the Washington Posthttp://mondoweiss.net/2010/04/wiesel-should-stop-offering-celestial-prescriptions-for-a-city-he-doesnt-live-in.html

    * AND SEE: “Can Jewish Liberals Transcend the Wiesel Doctrine? Countering the Israel Lobby’s Dominance”, by Alan Nasser, Counterpunch, 5/29/12

    “We must always take sides. Neutrality helps the oppressor, never the victim. Silence encourages the tormentor, never the tormented. Sometimes we must interfere. When human lives are endangered, when human dignity is in jeopardy, national borders and sensitivitiess become irrelevant.” ~ Elie Wiesel, From the “Kingdom of Memory: Reminiscences”
    “My loyalty to my people, to our people, and to Israel comes first and prevents me from saying anything critical of Israel outside Israel… As a Jew I see my role as a melitz yosher, a defender of Israel: I defend even her mistakes… I must identify with whatever Israel does – even with her errors.” ~ Elie Wiesel, “Against Silence”

    In the end, whether Israel’s penchant for serial atrocities encounters an effective obstacle will hinge on two types of resistance, elicited not from the fictitious “international community”, but from the active opponents of Israel’s ongoing projects, and from the withdrawal of moral and financial support for the ongoing reproduction of Israel as an apartheid Zionist State.
    Among the first type of response are the increasingly visible efforts, which gained momentum in the wake of the May 2010 flotilla murders, to promote sanctions, boycott and divestiture. . .
    . . . The second kind of response includes refusals to any longer make excuses for Israeli abominations, willingness finally to speak out in public protest, and the cessation of financial support for the rogue State. An especially powerful development would be the readiness of American Jews to announce loud and clear that Israel does not speak for them, to distance themselves from the agenda of the politically powerful Israel lobby, and to cross over into solidarity with the Palestinian people. None of this, I will suggest below, is as far-fetched as it might have seemed fifteen years ago.
    Among the key habits of thought, feeling and action that must be defeated is what we might call the Wiesel Doctrine, as expressed in the second passage at the head of this article, which pledges to “defend even [Israel’s] mistakes… [to] identify with whatever Israel does – even with her errors.” The Doctrine saturates the political consciousness of too many older (an important qualifier) liberal American Jews. These are the Jews most likely to contribute to AIPAC and for whom their perception of a given Senate, House or presidential candidate’s friendliness to Israeli policy is sufficient to determine support.
    . . . As Beinart observes, “As secular Jews drift away from America’s Zionist institutions, their orthodox counterparts will likely step into the breach.” Thus, the distance between largely secular American Jews and the Zionist establishment is likely to widen. But this will weaken the political power of the Israel lobby – inextricably linked, of course, to the Jewish establishment – only if American Jews as a whole are prepared to announce unambiguously their antipathy to their… representatives. The political and moral responsibility this places on American Jewish liberals cannot be overestimated. . .
    . . . [Peter] Bienart sees that as an American Jew he bears a special responsibility to act on the words, hypocritically penned by Elie Wiesel, cited at the head of this article: “We must always take sides…. Silence encourages the tormentor, never the tormented. Sometimes we must interfere.” I say he’s right.

    ENTIRE COMMENTARY – http://www.counterpunch.org/2012/05/29/countering-the-israel-lobbys-dominance/

    • DICKERSON3870
      DICKERSON3870
      September 29, 2013, 5:31 pm

      P.S. LASTLY SEE: “Elie Wiesel, Moral Mercenary”, by Richard Silverstein, Tikun Olam, 2/09/10

      [EXCERPTS] Did you know morality is for sale? No? Well, as far as Elie Wiesel is concerned it is. If the Palestinians had $500,000 THEY might find moral favor in Elie’s eyes as well. You see, since Bernie Madoff blew Wiesel’s foundation assets, I guess he’s found a need to sell his scruples to the highest bidder. Last year that would’ve been John Hagee, before whose Christians United for Israel conference Wiesel pronounced the anti-Semite and homophobe his “dear pastor”:

      For delivering one speech to Hagee’s congregation, Wiesel received a check for $500,000 toward his foundation, according to Marita Styrsky, the wife of Christians United for Israel Eastern Regional Director Victor Styrsky (Christians United is Hagee’s lobbying arm)

      . . . And the next time you hear of some good deed performed by the Elie Wiesel Foundation remember it’s probably funded by a man who said that Hitler was half-Jewish and doing the work of the Lord, John Hagee.

      SOURCE – http://www.richardsilverstein.com/2010/02/09/elie-wiesel-moral-mercenary/

      RELATED ARTICLES
      ● Wiesel scored $500,000 for speech to congregation of Hagee, a Holocaust revisionist (mondoweiss.net)
      ● John Hagee Interviews Elie Wiesel (usnews.com)

      • MHughes976
        MHughes976
        September 30, 2013, 9:51 am

        My knowledge of Wiesel is scrappy so I’m very much open to correction, but I suspect Hagee understands him quite well and is perhaps more open about the theological implications of the word ‘holocaust’ than many are. I think Wiesel has been influential in having the terrible events of WW2 discussed in religious language because they are unique and somehow inexplicable in human terms. I don’t know his ideas about Rwanda but I suppose that Kagame would like to hear that there is certain shadow of the same inexplicability, though not of the same uniqueness, about what happened there.
        I defy anyone to read Leviticus chapter 1 recalling that ‘holocaust’ is a traditional equivalent of ‘burned offering’, the most honourable kind of sacrifice, and also recalling the hideous events which ‘holocaust’ now describes and to read without any kind of shudder. If you put these ideas together a terrifying theology emerges in which Jewish people are destined perhaps for an indefinite span of time, until God’s mysterious purpose for the redemption of all humanity is worked out, to be both honoured and rewarded and also to be sacrificed. This isn’t anti-Semitic, just a frightening interpretation of what the favour of God and the task of redeeming the rest of humanity amount to.

      • Shmuel
        Shmuel
        September 30, 2013, 10:16 am

        I defy anyone to read Leviticus chapter 1 recalling that ‘holocaust’ is a traditional equivalent of ‘burned offering’ … a terrifying theology emerges …

        That is why in French and Italian (and I presume other languages), the Hebrew term Shoah (desolation, disaster) is preferred, and why some (such as Wondering Jew) prefer the Yiddish Khurbn (destruction, devastation) to “Holocaust” or its equivalents.

        There is a kind of hybrid theological view (pre-Khurbn) that sees the entire Jewish people (as opposed to only one of its sons) as the “lamb of God”, eternally sacrificed for the benefit of mankind as a whole. A terrifying idea indeed.

      • American
        American
        September 30, 2013, 11:02 am

        Hughes

        “I think Wiesel has been influential in having the terrible events of WW2 discussed in religious language because they are unique and somehow inexplicable in human terms. >>>

        Why do you think it is inexplicable in human terms?
        It seems to me that the religous keep looking to religion and the bible to ‘explain’ the actions of humans.
        They’ve been trying to do this since mankind was created.
        They’d be better off studying “humans” instead of trying to find some mystical God Plan in human events.
        The only thing in religion I’ve ever seen to account for human events is God gave them ‘free will’ and made them imperfect.
        What I can’t account for is people who want to chalk up everything to God’s Will or some divine plan—the only thing I can see in that is it gives them some comfort and relieves them of some responsibility because its all in ‘God hands’ and not theirs.

      • Walid
        Walid
        September 30, 2013, 11:21 am

        “There is a kind of hybrid theological view (pre-Khurbn) that sees the entire Jewish people (as opposed to only one of its sons) as the “lamb of God”, eternally sacrificed for the benefit of mankind as a whole.”

        Shmuel, Roman Catholics and some of other Christians would tell you that this theo view was superceded by the advent, death and resurrection of the “Agnus Dei”, which gave humanity a cleansed slate. Some would probably say that the concept of “scape goat” took care of that eventuality on behalf of the Jewish people. Either way, we appear to be off the hook or to put it more bluntly, we got away with whatever it was we were all guilty of.

      • Shmuel
        Shmuel
        September 30, 2013, 11:50 am

        Walid,

        In classical Jewish theology, there are many sacrifices (or near sacrifices) that fulfil many different purposes (including atonement) — beginning with the”binding of Isaac” (a one-time event), continuing with the Temple cult, and eventually with prayer (“may our lips offer [sacrificial] bullocks”) and self-denial, such as fasting (in lieu of animal sacrifice, in turn in lieu of giving one’s own life to God), and even martyrdom (“sanctification of God’s name”).

        I was thinking specifically of Hermann Cohen’s idea that the Jewish people, as the eternal “other”, is central to the divine plan to teach universal tolerance and love (if I’m not mistaken, he actually uses the “lamb” metaphor), so that eventually (in the “end of days”) the sacrifice would no longer be needed. It gave me the willies when I first read it (although it was part of Cohen’s argument against Zionism).

      • Walid
        Walid
        September 30, 2013, 12:42 pm

        Muslims appear to have picked up from the Jews the concept of the ritual slaughter at Adha to commemorate the Isaac episode and have stuck with it. I was reading about the custom of kapparot still practiced by Jews. Christians have it the easiest way since with the resurrection, all past, present and future sins are wiped clean and no further sacrifices are needed.

      • MahaneYehude1
        MahaneYehude1
        September 30, 2013, 1:47 pm

        Fortunately, the custom of slaughtering chicken as Kapparot almost disappeared in Israel and restricted to few places (In Jerusalem, to few places like Mea’a She’arim). Most of the people now prefer to give money donation as Kapparot for Yom kippur.

      • Walid
        Walid
        September 30, 2013, 11:38 pm

        “What I can’t account for is people who want to chalk up everything to God’s Will or some divine plan—the only thing I can see in that is it gives them some comfort and relieves them of some responsibility because its all in ‘God hands’ and not theirs.”

        That’s the Muslim’s and the Christians’ of the orient explanation of what makes the cookie crumble. I wonder if it’s more of a cultural thing than a religious one since both are on this same wave length.

  6. DICKERSON3870
    DICKERSON3870
    September 29, 2013, 5:46 pm

    RE: “Paul Kagame is a violent dictator who should be on trial for his actions, not celebrated for them. The idea that he can sit with Elie Wiesel and discuss how to protect the weak should be a very bad joke . . .” ~ Rusesabagina

    MY COMMENT: And having a billionaire like Sheldon Adelson with “anti-union mania”* make the opening remarks at this discussion of the “responsibility to protect the weak”, makes the bad joke even worse! ! !

    * RICK PERLSTEIN’S DISCOURSE ON SHELDON ADELSON’S “ANTI-UNION MANIA”:
    “Why GOP Mega-Donor Sheldon Adelson Is Mad, Bad and a Danger to the Republic”, By Rick Perlstein, Rolling Stone, 4/10/12

    [EXCERPTS] . . . Adelson’s anti-union mania (I would argue) is the most important thing to know about him. For it reveals just how crazy, and how unscrupulous, the man is.
    Let’s start at the very beginning. Adelson remembers meeting Gingrich in Washington in 1995, when Gingrich was House Speaker and Adelson was lobbying to get the U.S. embassy in Israel moved from Tel Aviv to Jerusalem. Other reports have them being introduced in 1996 by a far-right anti-union operative in Nevada who worked for Adelson. Details of the subsequent courtship are murky, although the huge favor Gingrich did for Adelson in 1996 by turning off a federal investigation of the gambling industry probably did a lot to cement their friendship.
    Two years later, Nevada conservatives sponsored a “Paycheck Protection” ballot initiative – the right-wing term for measures weakening unions by banning them from automatically deducting dues from members’ pay. Adelson was gung-ho for it – and “would spend any amount of money,” D. Taylor, secretary-treasurer of Las Vegas’s Culinary Workers Union Local 226, told me . . .
    . . . In 1999, Adelson closed one casino, the Sands, and completed work on a new one, the Venetian, stiffing so many contractors that there were at one time 366 liens against the property. Taylor, of the Culinary Workers, said he and his colleagues presumed that “like every other casino that had done that, workers in the [closed] hotel would be given priority when the [new] hotel was built.” Instead, Adelson refused even to talk. All this, in a union town like Vegas, was unprecedented. “Even when you’re having battles, you continue to have talks. Shit, we’re talking to the North Koreans right now!” he told me. “The Israelis talk to the Arabs. Talking doesn’t necessarily solve anything, but at least you understand the other guy’s position.” Adelson, not much interested in understanding the other guy’s position, proceeded to launch a campaign against the Culinary Workers that Taylor calls “beyond aggressive.”
    Right before the grand opening of the Venetian, in 1999, the Culinary Workers staged a demonstration on the public sidewalk out front. Adelson told the cops to start making arrests; the cops refused. Glen Arnodo, an official at
    the union at the time, relates what happened next: “I was standing on the sidewalk and they had two security guards say I was on private property, and if I didn’t move they’d have to put me under ‘citizen’s arrest.’ I ignored them.” The guards once again told the police to arrest Arnodo and again, he says, they refused. The Civil Rights hero Rep. John Lewis, in town to support the rally, said the whole thing reminded him of living in the South during Jim Crow. . .
    . . . Did I mention Adelson is nuts? But don’t take my word for it – it was George W. Bush who called him “some crazy Jewish billionaire.” . . .

    ENTIRE ARTICLE – http://www.rollingstone.com/politics/blogs/national-affairs/why-gop-mega-donor-sheldon-adelson-is-mad-bad-and-a-danger-to-the-republic-20120410

  7. miriam6
    miriam6
    September 30, 2013, 1:07 am

    All of a sudden Mondoweiss is so desperately concerned about Rwanda.

    How utterly phoney , cynical and nausea inducing.

    Simply because MW has found an anti Israel/anti Zionist angle on Rwanda.

    MW previously cared not one whit about whether or not Kagame was a warlord – they cared not one whit about Rwanda or how America and Britain backed the RPF in it’s campaign to overthrow the mainly Hutu ELECTED government in Rwanda .

    The RPF were most likely behind the assassination of the Rwandan president in 1994 – an event said to be the trigger for genocide.

    Always a bizarre , untenable theory that Hutus’ would kill the man keeping them (as the Hutu’s were the majority ) in power in Rwanda.

    Paul Kagame has long ( over the past twenty years ) been a supported hero of western liberals / governments / the human rights industry – who have overlooked the fact that Kagame came to power in 1994 as a result of what was effectively an American/ British backed coup.

    In the early 1990’s both the British and American governments helped to destabilise Rwanda by supporting the invading RPF.

    The result was carnage. Then fleeing refugees were branded as ‘genocidaires’ by so called human rights organisations.

    The Hutu refugees were denied the basic human rights generally afforded fleeing refugees and those not massacred by the RPF were forced back to Rwanda to face more rough justice at the hands of the new undemocratic Kagame led RPF regime.

    And the West , who helped create the carnage of the early 1990’s in Rwanda including the mass slaughter of 1994 – by supporting Kagame’s RPF – applauded and lauded Kagame for saving Rwanda from further genocide.

    How disgusting.

    And now – Kagame – after been lauded as a hero in the West for so long is now a villain.

    And Mondoweiss – despite having previously shown no interest whatsoever in Rwanda or Paul Kagame – has jumped on the anti Kagame bandwagon simply because they have found a new stick with which to beat Israel.

    I am no fan of Elie Wiesel.

    He chose to bestow his supposed moral authority as a genocide survivor upon American / European meddling and finally military intervention by NATO in the Balkans in the 1990’s on the grounds that a ‘new Holocaust’ was occurring in places like Bosnia and Kosovo.

    But I would imagine that someone like Philip Weiss – the so called ‘leftist’ – would no doubt have supported Wiesel in that aim of provoking intervention in someone else’s bloody CIVIL war.

    • W.Jones
      W.Jones
      September 30, 2013, 1:58 am

      If victors write the history, that may be the case in Rwanda. While the common portrayal is one way of Hutus massacring Tutzis, who won the war, perhaps the reality may not be so simple.

      Indeed, if the Hutus were more fierce and caused more casualties, then why didn’t they win? In fact, in light of some dissidents’ claims and UN Documents I heard about from a researcher, it’s possible that the Tutzis caused more civilian casualties, if not a similar amount.

      • miriam6
        miriam6
        September 30, 2013, 2:43 am

        If victors write the history, that may be the case in Rwanda.

        Well the West has turned against Kagame now – so perhaps not entirely..

        But so far the frame up against the Hutu’s as the ‘genocidaires’ and the RPF as the ‘angels’ of events in Rwanda in 1994 has held up for twenty years – but perhaps not for very much longer given that more and more people are beginning to see evidence pointing to Kagame and the RPF as the culprits behind the assassination in April 1994 of the Rwandan Hutu President Juvenal Habyarimana when the plane carrying him and also Burundian President Cyprien Ntaramira was shot down.

        At the time the assassination was attributed to Rwandan Hutu’s but again – why on earth would they kill a man who empowered them?

        Carla del Ponte the ardent chief prosecutor for the ICC at the Hague and Rwandan war crimes trials in Arusha has said that if there is evidence linking the RPF and Kagame to the assassination of Habyarimana- then the case for the killings in Rwanda of April 1994 being considered genocide is weakened.

        After Del Ponte said this she was removed from the post she had occupied until then.

        Paul Rusesabagina, a Rwandan of mixed Hutu and Tutsi origin whose life-saving efforts was the basis of the 2004 film Hotel Rwanda, has supported the allegation that Kagame and the RPF were behind the plane downing, and wrote in November 2006:[40]

        “It defies logic why the UN Security Council has never mandated an investigation of this airplane missile attack to establish who was responsible, especially since everyone agrees it was the one incident that touched off the mass killings commonly referred to as the “Rwandan genocide of 1994”.

        http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Assassination_of_Juvénal_Habyarimana_and_Cyprien_Ntaryamira

      • W.Jones
        W.Jones
        September 30, 2013, 6:07 pm

        See, you can have good insights and read behind official stories to find real ones. What would that look like in terms of Israeli society?

      • miriam6
        miriam6
        October 1, 2013, 12:05 pm

        Wjones;

        Patronising much?

        What sort of response do you expect?

        Yes wjones I have looked at Israeli society again and suddenly realised it is in fact a reincarnation of the Third Reich and the most evil society than ever existed?

        Is that what you are implying I am supposed to think about Israeli society?

        You need to read more of my comments- you wouldn’t be making such presumptuous patronising statements about me.

        Try this one for starters.;

        http://mondoweiss.net/2013/09/kristol-says-obama-appeases-the-new-hitler-rouhani-making-israel-the-leader-of-the-west.html#comment-596790

      • annie
        annie
        October 1, 2013, 1:00 pm

        Patronising much?

        strawman much?

        a reincarnation of the Third Reich and the most evil society than ever existed

        hmm, w.jones didn’t say that or mention nazis, but you know that. maybe he was thinking of south africa. then you link to yourself trolling on donald w/more of the same reprehensible enough as it is without having to resort to trivialising comparisons with Nazi Germany?

        who’s crutching on the nazis again miriam? another ‘ “you are implying”–stretch’. such a hypocrite. but it’s par for the course. netanyahu conjuring alleged nazi-iran similarities this morning.

        triple yawn. tell your handlers we’d like new and better hasbara.

      • miriam6
        miriam6
        October 1, 2013, 3:06 pm

        [email protected];

        Way to go Annie.

        I was just about to write and post a reply to Walid and now my precious time I should have spent doing THAT far more worthwhile job – is now taken up with having to reply to your attempt to troll ME.

        I say your are trolling me because you have made your comment purely for the sake of attacking ME rather than dealing with the subject at hand here on this thread – which is RWANDA.

        Presumably you are afraid I might actually be able to engage with Walid and let him see I am far from opposed to Palestinian rights and self determination as he seems to believe.

        As it is I have been delayed in my project by having to reply to YOU.

        Annie [email protected]: then you link to yourself trolling on donald w/more of the same reprehensible enough as it is without having to resort to trivialising comparisons with Nazi Germany?

        Underhanded much Annie? You deliberately chose to pull ONE single sentence from the comment I linked to in my comment

        You claim that Zionists just love to go on about the Holocaust and the Nazi’s..

        As it turns out – your anti Zionist commenters here on MW just LOVE to draw lazy, offensive and out of proportion comparisons between Nazism Nazi Germany whenever it suits them.

        Which is something you ought to be critical of

        Some examples are here;

        Sounds like the Israeli-Nazis were being lenient.


        http://mondoweiss.net/2013/04/another-address-deported.html/comment-page-1#comment-559008

        The term Israeli-Nazis isn’t just a cheap shot, it reflects a very real similarity between the philosophies of Zionism and Nazism that is evident to anyone who has even a passing familiarity with either.Blut-und-boden, lebensraum, uber/untermensch all have their partners in Zionism as does the Nazis “Aryan homeland” with the Zionists “Eretz Israel.” The Israelis have even got their own version of the Ahnenerbe.


        http://mondoweiss.net/2013/04/another-address-deported.html/comment-page-1#comment-559357

        By contrast commenters are always eager to make comparisons between Nazi Germany and Israel.Why not? The Jewish Agency for Palestine/Israel, the WZO, and the Zionist regimes in Israel are the result of the same 19th century “blood and soil” political movements that preach the same metaphysical racial nonsense.

        http://mondoweiss.net/2013/08/first-round-of-palestinian-prisoners-released-by-israel.html/comment-page-1#comment-585617.

        governments whose policies include sending idf terror squads into the West Bank and on on the edge of the Warsaw Ghetto which they’ve turned Gaza into

        http://mondoweiss.net/2013/08/first-round-of-palestinian-prisoners-released-by-israel.html/comment-page-1#comment-584919

        Some people say white suppremacy as “natural, normal and a sign to a will to survive.” The entire Nazi race theory was described by them in almost exactly these terms.

        http://mondoweiss.net/2013/08/first-round-of-palestinian-prisoners-released-by-israel.html/comment-page-1#comment-584697

        New thread ;

        R: Back in the day others tried to convince the Poles that ‘Lebensraum’ meant that they had to share their land with the ‘Lebenraumers,’ but that didn’t sit so well.
        http://mondoweiss.net/2013/08/israels-dancing-soldiers.html/comment-page-1#comment-589275

        Of course. When you treat the people who your state’s official ideology considers to be the “others” (or sub-human, die Untermenschen, etc.)

        http://mondoweiss.net/2013/08/israels-dancing-soldiers.html/comment-page-1#comment-589108

        By demonizing one part you are only put an obstacle for peace and reconciliation.Oh, really? Would you have applied the same logic to Nazi Germany and its Jewish victims? Or to slaveholders and their slaves? Or to a rapist and his victim?

        http://mondoweiss.net/2013/08/israels-dancing-soldiers.html/comment-page-1#comment-589522

        Annie said; netanyahu conjuring alleged nazi-iran similarities this morning.

        As it happens I share your disdain and find Netanyahu’s constant linking of Iran with Nazi Germany to be reprehensible and in general all his other statements exploiting the Holocaust for political capital.

        I have posted comments quite recently in reply to seafoid and others – also saying that I find the claim by Zionists/Israeli leaders to speak on behalf of the dead Jews of the Holocaust reprehensible.

        However those perfectly reasonable comments I made were DELETED by the mods- denying my the chance to state that point clearly.

        BTW Annie your talk of ‘apartheid’ would hold some legitimacy if the Palestinians had begun to call for one single state.

        As it is the Palestinian leadership still seems committed to the solution of a state of their own on the OPT with East Jerusalem as it’s capital.

        Therefore the situation of Israel’s military occupation of the OPT is just that.

        If the Palestinians want a state of their own in the OPT alongside Israel we are talking about a struggle between two distinct nationalities rather than Apartheid.

        See my comment here which explains my opposition to racial discrimination against Palestinian Arab citizens of Israel and my opposition to the military occupation of the OPT.

        http://mondoweiss.net/2013/09/kristol-says-obama-appeases-the-new-hitler-rouhani-making-israel-the-leader-of-the-west.html#comment-596790

      • annie
        annie
        October 1, 2013, 3:20 pm

        now my precious time I should have spent doing THAT far more worthwhile job

        it’s not often i agree w/you. someone bent on making us all suffer must have moderated your comment . ha!

      • miriam6
        miriam6
        October 1, 2013, 3:26 pm

        I would just like to add that the latter half of my comment above which reads;

        Annie said; netanyahu conjuring alleged nazi-iran similarities this morning…

        and ends here with this;

        …See my comment here which explains my opposition to racial discrimination against Palestinian Arab citizens of Israel and my opposition to the military occupation of the OPT.
        ( plus the link to my comment )

        was meant to be OUTSIDE the blockquoted commenter comments.

        Handling HTML multiple blockquotes is not my strong point yet.

        I meant the final three blockquote comments to be all neat and tidy within their own cute little blockquotes.

        Though the content of those comments is far from cute..

      • miriam6
        miriam6
        October 1, 2013, 3:30 pm

        Would you care to actually COMMENT on the contents of my comment?

        http://mondoweiss.net/2013/09/rwanda-cooper-union.html/comment-page-1#comment-598412

        Or are you just too ‘cowardly’?

        C’mon Annie- deal with my argument – put up or shut up..

      • Woody Tanaka
        Woody Tanaka
        October 1, 2013, 3:41 pm

        “As it turns out – your anti Zionist commenters here on MW just LOVE to draw lazy, offensive and out of proportion comparisons between Nazism Nazi Germany whenever it suits them.”

        “Which is something you ought to be critical of”

        Nonsense. There are many comparisons with Nazism and Nazi Germany which are perfectly appropriate. Just because it puts israel and israelis in a bad light should spur them on to change their ways, not try to shut someone up.

        “‘BTW Annie your talk of ‘apartheid’ would hold some legitimacy if the Palestinians had begun to call for one single state.”

        Oh, for pete’s sakes. The israelis apply one set of laws (civil law) to Jews and another set of laws (military law) to Palestinians. Regardless of what outcome the Palestinians want, what the israelis are doing is Apartheid. Don’t believe me? Ask Desmond Tutu or Nelson Mandela. Because they know a hell of a lot more about Apartheid than you do.

      • annie
        annie
        October 1, 2013, 3:56 pm

        lol, no i don’t ‘care to comment’ on your screed miriam, i assumed that was self evident.

        btw, i could care less if you call me a coward. you already insinuated i was a holocaust denier and then lied about ‘thanking me’. you’re on my s***list.

      • W.Jones
        W.Jones
        October 1, 2013, 4:44 pm

        You pointed me to:

        I don’t bang on and on about Israel’s faults because the rest of you do so frequently enough as it is. Much of the criticism of Israel on this site I do accept is entirely fair.

        So in other words you do look behind the official story, but you don’t discuss that with us because we do it more frequently.

        So, what exactly of Marc’s statements here do you actually agree with?

      • Hostage
        Hostage
        October 1, 2013, 6:49 pm

        As it turns out – your anti Zionist commenters here on MW just LOVE to draw lazy, offensive and out of proportion comparisons between Nazism Nazi Germany whenever it suits them.

        I notice that you snipped-off much of my comment, which wasn’t lazy, offensive, or out of proportion at all:

        The Zionist Organization and its subsidiaries were a business and they had a longstanding formal business partnership with the Nazis regime [Haavara Ltd.]. Israel adopted a Nazi Collaborators Act, because collaboration had been perceived to be a common enough practice among some of the citizens and officials of Israel.

        I’ve noted in the past that Zionist propaganda quotes top my list of the most stupid remarks ever posted to Mondoweiss – and I sincerely meant every word of it: http://mondoweiss.net/2012/12/charting-the-peace-process.html#comment-520821

        The founders of Political Zionism actually engaged in more lazy, racially offensive, out of proportion commentary than anyone that you quoted. I’ve noted in the past that they claimed 1) all Gentiles had incurable hereditary mental disorders [Pinsker] or that Diaspora Jews actually cause anti-Semitism by producing too many feeble intellects, revolutionaries, and greedy bankers [Herzl]. They claimed that all of this could be magically cured by simply establishing a Jewish-only homeland where we could be isolated from the Gentiles who make normal life for us impossible.

        *Herzl specifically taught that:

        The Jewish question exists wherever Jews live in perceptible numbers. Where it does not exist, it is carried by Jews in the course of their migrations. We naturally move to those places where we are not persecuted, and there our presence produces persecution. This is the case in every country, and will remain so, even in those highly civilized—for instance, France—until the Jewish question finds a solution on a political basis. The unfortunate Jews are now carrying the seeds of Anti-Semitism into England; they have already introduced it into America.

        Anti-Semitism increases day by day and hour by hour among the nations; indeed, it is bound to increase, because the causes of its growth continue to exist and cannot be removed. Its remote cause is our loss of the power of assimilation during the Middle Ages; its immediate cause is our excessive production of mediocre intellects, who cannot find an outlet downwards or upwards—that is to say, no wholesome outlet in either direction. When we sink, we become a revolutionary proletariat, the subordinate officers of all revolutionary parties; and at the same time, when we rise, there rises also our terrible power of the purse.

        See — The Jewish State, link to gutenberg.org

        Make no mistake about it Herzl wanted a global ethnic Jewish empire:

        “It is precisely the duty of the leader to set the people on the path which, by apparent detours, leads to the goal. You refuse the life which is offered you out of fear, cowardice. Miserable eunuchs that you are, you sacrifice the sources of your power. Look at Britain! It pours its excess popula­tion into the vast empire that it was able to acquire. Are we then so craven as to be frightened of the offer made to us? Starting from their national base, nations have built colonial empires that have made their fortunes. Let us accept the chance offered us to become a miniature England. Let us start by acquiring our colonies! From them, we shall launch the conquest of our Homeland. Let the lands between Kilimanjaro and Kenya become those of the first colony of Israel! They, rather than Edmond de Rothschild’s philanthropic supported refugees, will constitute the real Rishon le-Zion, the first- fruits of Zionism, of the New Israel. If we accept Chamberlain’s offer with gratitude, we strengthen our position, we oblige him to do something wise for us should our commission of enquiry reject the land proposed. In our transactions with this mighty nation we shall acquire the status of a national power. We will not stop there! Other States will follow Britain’s example, new “reserves of power” will be created in Mozambique with the Portuguese, in the Congo with the Belgians, in Tripolitania with the Italians.”

        link to books.google.com

        Of course, the notion that Palestine is “our national homeland” is hopelessly nonsensical 19th century “blood and soil” political propaganda.

      • Hostage
        Hostage
        October 1, 2013, 7:16 pm

        “‘BTW Annie your talk of ‘apartheid’ would hold some legitimacy if the Palestinians had begun to call for one single state.”

        The One State Declaration (London-Madrid 2007) was initially signed by Palestinian leaders and groups. It has subsequently been endorsed by more of them. http://www.counterpunch.org/2007/11/29/the-one-state-declaration/

        Oceans of ink have been spilled by Zionist propagandists shreying gevault over the Palestinian National Charter. It was based upon the demand for a single state in historical Palestine and represented the official PLO position from 1964-1993, prior to the exchange of letters between Chairman Arafat and Prime Minister Rabin. http://www.un.int/wcm/content/site/palestine/pid/12363

      • RoHa
        RoHa
        October 2, 2013, 1:23 am

        “Let the lands between Kilimanjaro and Kenya become those of the first colony of Israel!…new “reserves of power” will be created … in Tripolitania with the Italians.”

        So the overthrow of Ghaddafi, and the recent questionable events in Nairobi …

        (Too much aposiopesis. Sorry. But sometimes …)

      • miriam6
        miriam6
        October 2, 2013, 2:15 pm

        [email protected]:

        What a poor ‘anti- hasbara’ effort by you Hostage;

        I searched online for The One State Declaration ( London-Madrid 2007 )and came up with this link to the EI website here;

        http://electronicintifada.net/content/one-state-declaration/793

        I found only two tiny organisations signing a letter , which is all in fact that the ‘One State Declaration ‘ actually amounts to – plus a veritable hodge podge of individuals at least 25 of whom are not Jewish/ Israeli or Palestinian – but nationals of other countries who really have no business whatsoever in having a say in the future of the I / P territories.

        The signatories include Raymond Deane who is Irish- Tariq Ali who is British – and Alan Hart – British .

        So nice try but I am not fooled.

        A letter signed by a hodge podge of about 60 + people DOES NOT amount to an overthrow of the two state solution paradigm and the fact that – from a peace negotiations standpoint – even now – a two state solution is STILL the only game in town.
        Therefore we are still talking about a conflict between two separate national entities rather than being able to argue that Israel’s occupation of the OPT is apartheid .To argue that it is apartheid even though the Palestinian leadership have opted for a state of their own in the OPT is illogical.

        Your second link takes me to the now outdated PLO National Charter dating from 1964.
        Well, – you must be fully aware yourself that that PLO mandate / demand for a single state has been overtaken, superseded and put to one side by Arafat himself in 1988 when the PLO recognised the state of Israel in which PLO acceptance of two states – one Palestinian and one Israeli is implicit

        Here is Arafat saying just that here;

        Posted: December 07, 1988STOCKHOLM, Sweden — PLO chief Yasser Arafat said today he accepted the existence of the state of Israel

        “This was clear in the resolutions adopted by the Palestine National Council when we said clearly there are two states in Palestine, a Palestinian state and a Jewish state,” he told a Stockholm news conference.
        He was referring to last month’s decision of the PNC, the Palestinian parliament-in-exile, to accept U.N. Resolutions 242 and 338, which implied recognition of Israel’s right to exist

        “The PNC accepted two states, a Palestinian state and a Jewish state, Israel. Is that clear enough?” Arafat told the news conference.

        http://articles.philly.com/1988-12-07/news/26228866_1_rita-hauser-plo-chief-yasser-arafat-jewish-delegation

        So – all in all for less than half it’s existence the PLO wanted a single state then latterly from 1988 onwards the two state solution has been the model for the Palestinian leadership.

        Again – the Palestinians and their supporters cannot reasonably argue that the military occupation is also Apartheid on top of being a military occupation as long as the Palestinians are saying they want there own state ( in which no Jewish settlers would be allowed to remain).

        However if the Palestinian leadership decided to adopt a one state paradigm then they probably would have grounds for arguing that the occupation of the OPT is Apartheid.

      • Hostage
        Hostage
        October 2, 2013, 3:47 pm

        I found only two tiny organisations signing a letter , which is all in fact that the ‘One State Declaration ‘ actually amounts to – plus a veritable hodge podge of individuals at least 25 of whom are not Jewish/ Israeli or Palestinian – but nationals of other countries who really have no business whatsoever in having a say in the future of the I / P territories.

        Miriam you claimed that talk of ‘apartheid’ would hold some legitimacy if the Palestinians had begun to call for one single state.” Of course they were all doing that for most of the 65 years of occupation according to the terms of the PLO Charter.

        I just gave you a few examples. Even back in 2007, there were an adequate number of Palestinian individuals and organizations calling for a single state solution, including a few political parties, like al-Ard, that are considered illegal associations under Israeli Supreme Court and Central Election Commission decisions because members promote a single Palestinian state. Let’s face it, your argument against the legitimacy of the apartheid label was fallacious.

        Ali Abunimah signed the one state declaration. His Palestinian father chaired the delegation that normalized relations between Israel and Jordan. So how many more Abunimah’s do you think it will require to chair a delegation to normalize relations between the Palestinians and the Israeli Jews?

    • miriam6
      miriam6
      September 30, 2013, 2:10 am

      I would like to add that Bernard Levy is even worse than Elie Wiesel.

      Far more despicable in fact.

      Bernard Levy was instrumental in propagandising against only ONE party to the 1990’s civil wars of the Balkans – the Serbs – even though the Croatians in particular carried out brutal atrocities and ethnic cleansing of Serbs in Croatia – let alone in Bosnia – and also the Bosnian Muslims committed atrocities too in Bosnia against Serbs and Croats.

      Levy – along with other so called intellectuals / so called leftists – including other Jewish ( Elie Wiesel was one of them too ) and non- Jewish ones – was instrumental in agitating and providing a supposedly ‘moral case’ for meddling by America and Europe and then finally military ‘ humanitarian’ ( when has militarism EVER been humane I ask you) intervention – effectively war on only one party to the civil wars – the Serbs.

      People like Levy and other so called leftists / liberals claimed intervention in the Balkans was ‘necessary’ because Bosnia’s civil war was in fact another ‘Holocaust’.

      Of course- Levy was again involved as a cheerleader for the disastrous NATO meddling and finally military intervention in Libya which has subsequently destabilised North Africa and unleashed destructive Islamist forces.

      Because another ‘ Holocaust’ was about to take place in Libya presumably.

      Calling practically ANY war or atrocity these days a ‘Holocaust’ or a potential ‘Holocaust’ has been all the rage in the West for at least 25 years now.

      In fact the Biafran civil war was the first ‘humanitarian intervention’ called for by Westerners on the look out for a new ‘Holocaust’- genocide – for their generation to get their moral rocks off on.

      See what British filmmaker Adam Curtis has to say about how Biafra became a cause for the chattering liberal classes and how interest /propaganda for intervention there was created by an advertising company.

      http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/adamcurtis/2011/03/goodies_and_baddies.html

      • Keith
        Keith
        October 2, 2013, 5:24 pm

        MIRIAM 6- “I would like to add that Bernard Levy is even worse than Elie Wiesel.”

        I agree. Also, your highlighting of liberal hypocrisy in supporting “humanitarian” interventions is justified (Yugoslavia was a travesty). Finally, your linked comments regarding an Israel with equal rights for all seemed reasonable. Yet, you are attacked as a hasbarist and troll. Hmmm.

      • Hostage
        Hostage
        October 3, 2013, 3:33 am

        Finally, your linked comments regarding an Israel with equal rights for all seemed reasonable. Yet, you are attacked as a hasbarist and troll. Hmmm.

        I didn’t accuse her of being a troll or hasbarist in those particular connections. In this particular case, she claimed that Mondoweiss had never expressed any concern before about the crimes committed in Rwanda or by its officials. But in fact, the article and comment archives here are full of stories on that subject regarding the situations in Rwanda, the Congo, Uganda, & etc.

      • miriam6
        miriam6
        October 3, 2013, 6:15 am

        [email protected];

        Yet, you are attacked as a hasbarist and troll. Hmmm.

        Thank you for your comment in it’s entirety.

        It is pleasant for me that someone on this thread has actually bothered to read my comments and linked to comments – and carefully too.

        It does seem to me that the more I open up and try to explain my position the more I am attacked.

        I am pleased that we seem to be on the same page about Yugoslavia and the whole farcical and dangerous idea of so called ‘humanitarian’ interventions so championed by the liberal Left in the 1990’s.

        I think that this enthusiasm amongst Western politicians for ‘humanitarian’ militarism / intervention was fostered by and allowed to take root in political discourse in the West in the 1990’s by the liberal Left’s unquestioning support of Western meddling and then NATO military action in the Balkans.

        In fact the liberal Left and liberal media were actively agitating for Western nations to meddle and intervene as much as possible in the break-up and subsequent Yugoslav civil wars – and to demonise one party to the conflict only – the Serbs.

        I think that support for intervention in the Balkans made it all the easier for Tony Blair to drag Britain into the war against Iraq in 2003.

        Also the liberal Left were responsible for painting the conflict in Rwanda in the most simplistic of terms – much to the detriment of it’s peoples and our understanding of what had actually happened in Rwanda.

        Most shocking of all was the way aid agencies so readily complied with the idea that the Hutu refugees were ‘ genocidaires’ and thus the aid agencies abandoned their duty of care towards Rwandan Hutu refugees – who were then forced out of their camps in Zaire/ Congo to face the brutality of invading RPF soldiers and also punitive reprisals upon their forced return to Rwanda.

        The Rwandan Hutu refugees were labelled ‘genocidaires’ – i.e. ‘those who commit genocide’ – ironically and disgustingly enough – by human rights / Aid worker NGO’s – because the Western media , human rights industry , the liberal Left , and politicians refused to see that the situation in Rwanda was in fact far more complicated than the simple minded morality play that they had imagined.

        There was also plenty of guilty responsibility amongst Western powers to be kept from public view – particularly the guilt of the Americans, British and the French whose support for the RPF and to a lesser extent the Habyarimana government – had only served to intensify the bloody struggle for power in Rwanda between the mainly Tutsi invading RPF army and the mostly Hutu government of Habyarimana.

        The Rwandan Hutu refugees were simply fleeing from a Tutsi led RPF regime which had just seized power in Rwanda by force.

        Rather than understanding that the new RPF regime had no legitimacy – unlike the democratically elected former government of Juvenal Habyarimana – and furthermore understanding that what had taken place in Rwanda might well have been a coup d’état by the RPF – they chose to claim that genocide had occurred in Rwanda.

        So that became the story – that that was why the Rwandan Hutu’s fled Rwanda for the camps in Zaire/ Congo – because they ( the Rwandan Hutus ) were in fact guilty of genocide – not because they were fleeing an illegitimate and brutal RPF regime.

        Thus the idea that genocide had taken place in Rwanda and that the RPF were the ‘good guys’ – rather than being a party as they had been in the early 1990’s – to the intensifying of the conflict that ultimately made the mass killings of April 1994 possible – the myth that the RPF had saved Rwanda from further genocide began to take root.

        Another similarity between Rwanda and Yugoslavia was in terms of public relations with the media.

        It does seem to be the case that in 1993 the RPF had won the propaganda war to win Western media sympathy in a way the Hutu led Rwandan government of Habyarimana had failed to do.

        Similarity – in the battle for Western sympathy the Croats and later the Bosnian Muslims succeeded in getting Westerners – including the media – on their side.

      • miriam6
        miriam6
        October 3, 2013, 7:28 am

        [email protected];

        Hi Keith.
        I have posted a fairly long comment in reply to you already – about ‘humanitarian’ intervention, the Balkans but mostly about Rwanda.
        I am hoping it will be posted on the thread.

        On the subject of the Balkans Misha Glenny’s book The Fall of Yugoslavia is very good.

        I wonder if you would be interested in these links to an article by Barrie Collins about Rwanda.

        Barrie Collins has written extensively about Rwanda including a book called ‘The Myth of Obedience in Rwanda’ I THINK it is called.

        He has also written about the Arusha show trials in Kenya of Rwandan Hutu defendants.
        I can’t find a link to that particular article but this long article by him about the events surrounding the mass killings in 1994 in Rwanda is very good;
        http://www.globalresearch.ca/rwanda-obscuring-the-truth-about-the-genocide/9884

        This second link contains the same article by Barrie Collins but also has other information and videos including ones of Paul Kagame;
        http://survivorsnetworks.blogspot.co.uk/2009/01/behind-scenes-at-hotel-rwanda.html

        Rwanda and the RPF from a black leftist site;
        http://www.blackagendareport.com/?q=content/rwanda-rpf-and-myth-non-intervention

        Also this website – which has a photo of Paul Kagame with the Obamas – all three of them smiling away-;
        http://thewe.biz/weplanet/africa/rwanda/living_among_the_dead.htm

        On the subject of ‘humanitarian’ intervention , human rights and international relations – Professor David Chandler is very good.

        Here is a link to his website ;
        http://www.davidchandler.org/biography/biography.htm

      • Keith
        Keith
        October 3, 2013, 11:07 am

        HOSTAGE- “I didn’t accuse her of being a troll or hasbarist in those particular connections.”

        I wasn’t referring to you. In my quick skimming, these labels came up several times (I don’t recall who used them). My only point being that MAYBE there may be more to Mariam6 than has heretofore met some folks’ eye. Her comments regarding Bernard-Henri Levy certainly resonated with me. Nothing more than that.

    • Hostage
      Hostage
      September 30, 2013, 6:17 am

      All of a sudden Mondoweiss is so desperately concerned about Rwanda. How utterly phoney , cynical and nausea inducing. . . . MW previously cared not one whit about whether or not Kagame was a warlord – they cared not one whit about Rwanda or how America and Britain backed the RPF in it’s campaign to overthrow the mainly Hutu ELECTED government in Rwanda .

      You might try actually reading Mondoweiss or searching the article and comment archives before making any more absurd claims like this one. Your ignorance about Mondoweiss coverage of a particular subject isn’t very interesting to the rest of us. Only a troll makes a regular habit of spamming the threads here with logically inconsistent arguments and contrived, petty, and intentionally insulting comments.

      A simple review of the articles authored by James North alone would have turned-up a couple of dozen on the historical and current situations in Rwanda, the Congo, Cote d’Ivoire, sub-Saharan Africa, Egypt, Sudan, Uganda, South Africa, & etc. It takes multiple pages just to list them all. BTW, they include critiques of main stream media figures covering-up for Rwanda and Paul Kagame. http://mondoweiss.net/author/james-north

      On more than a dozen occasions, I’ve commented on the ICTR in connection with its role in expanding the scope of the definition of the crime of genocide, and in connection with its statute, judges, and decisions in individual cases. I’ve also commented on fact finding reports about criminal situations in a host of other countries, regional human rights court cases, and the recent establishment of the extraordinary criminal tribunal by Senegal and the African Union.

      • just
        just
        September 30, 2013, 7:28 am

        Nice take down of the concern troll who is witless & running around with her hair on fire, pointing her fingers in every direction, except at herself.

        (navel -gazing does not count!)

    • Walid
      Walid
      September 30, 2013, 11:39 am

      “Philip Weiss – the so called ‘leftist’ – would no doubt have supported Wiesel in that aim of provoking intervention in someone else’s bloody CIVIL war.” (Miriam)

      You sure don’t sound like you like this Wiesel character or anyone else messing in civil wars. Did you feel that way about that other Zionist Bernard-Henri Lévy and his bragging on how he provoked the NATO bombing of Libya? Actually, some here at Mondo thought it was a good thing at first what with the romantic “arab spring” in the air, until they understood better.

      • libra
        libra
        September 30, 2013, 5:27 pm

        Walid: You sure don’t sound like you like this Wiesel character…

        Or indeed this Weiss character. Or that Levy character. Or any other so called ‘leftist’.

        Clearly poor old miriam’s got the wrong end of the stick when it comes to on-line dating. Somehow I doubt that she’s going to meet the so called ‘Mr. Right’ on Mondoweiss.

    • talknic
      talknic
      October 1, 2013, 5:31 am

      miriam6 “All of a sudden Mondoweiss is so desperately concerned about Rwanda.

      How utterly phoney , cynical and nausea inducing.”

      Off topic. How utterly phoney , cynical and nausea inducing and typical of Israel’s propagandists. Straight out of the Hasbara handbook …. Mondoweiss is not the subject.

  8. miriam6
    miriam6
    September 30, 2013, 12:36 pm

    [email protected];

    Did you feel that way about that other Zionist Bernard-Henri Lévy and his bragging on how he provoked the NATO bombing of Libya? Actually, some here at Mondo thought it was a good thing at first what with the romantic “arab spring” in the air, until they understood better.

    I have criticised NATO’s bombing of Libya many times on MW.

    I also have two comments awaiting moderation on this thread – one of which deals with exactly the point you are making about Bernard Levy as cheerleader for the NATO war on Libya.

    http://mondoweiss.net/2013/09/in-2012-settler-population-grew-three-times-faster-than-rest-of-israel.html/comment-page-1#comment-595103

    http://mondoweiss.net/2013/09/kristol-says-obama-appeases-the-new-hitler-rouhani-making-israel-the-leader-of-the-west.html#comment-596713

    http://mondoweiss.net/2013/09/kristol-says-obama-appeases-the-new-hitler-rouhani-making-israel-the-leader-of-the-west.html#comment-596682

    http://mondoweiss.net/2013/08/egyptian-massacre-exposes-us-hypocrisy-in-israel-and-palestine.html#comment-587549

    http://mondoweiss.net/2013/08/in-order-to-criticize-settlements-liberal-zionists-hit-netanyahu-for-releasing-palestinian-prisoners.html#comment-583854

    http://mondoweiss.net/2013/08/bored-with-the-jews.html#comment-583547

    • Walid
      Walid
      October 1, 2013, 12:18 am

      Miriam, I apologize for not having read all of your comments and for having missed some of your replies to me. You are sending out mixed signals on your position and evidently don’t support some of the Zionist points of view on several things discussed here. Being against rights of the Palestinians while being anti-Wiesel/Lévy and the things they are doing in the name of Zionism is confusing. Would you please explain.

    • Cliff
      Cliff
      October 2, 2013, 5:49 am

      What miriam666 is saying is, is that she hates the Palestinians and think they should get old and die in a 2-State-Prison or in their bantustans as ‘warehoused’ people and let Jewish supremacists have their Jewish country club to themselves on Historic Palestine.

      And something blah blah about the Balkans and another Holocaust re: Wiesel and Levy.

  9. miriam6
    miriam6
    October 2, 2013, 1:47 pm

    [email protected];

    And something blah ,blah about the Balkans and another Holocaust re: Wiesel and Levy.

    How enervating to find that you regard NATO militarism in Libya- the Balkans- Western meddling in Rwanda/ Congo no more than boring old ‘blah, blah’..

    To turn your question on it’s head- why is it that you care so ardently about the Palestinians but not about those other issues you have dismissed as so much ‘blah, blah, blah’?

    What sort of bizarre tunnel- vision wrong headed version of leftist thinking can possibly be in your head?

    I wonder ..

    I am not going to bother replying to your mindless slanders against me in the future.

    You are quite clearly absolutely fixed in your stereotyped notions of me.

    What miriam6 is saying is, is that she hates the Palestinians and think they should get old and die in a 2-State-Prison or in their Bantustans as blah blah blah..

    Cont page 96

    I suggest that you read the links in this comment to Walid plus the second link also in this comment..

    They make my views clear about the stuff you mention in your latest mindless diatribe against me.

    http://mondoweiss.net/2013/09/rwanda-cooper-union.html/comment-page-1#comment-598131

    http://mondoweiss.net/2013/09/kristol-says-obama-appeases-the-new-hitler-rouhani-making-israel-the-leader-of-the-west.html/comment-page-1#comment-596790

Leave a Reply