Trending Topics:

‘NYT’ casts Israelis as victims of Palestinians who complain bitterly about oppression

on 41 Comments

Lately Jodi Rudoren of the New York Times has been passing along Israeli hasbara to Americans in an unquestioning manner. Today she has an article putting forward the Israeli view that certain Palestinian statements about Israel constitute “incitement” of hatred– and that’s why Palestinians don’t deserve a state. The New York Times has further underwritten that view by publishing the Israeli government report (which I am told reflects work by this lobby group led by a radical settler) about Palestinian incitement.

Rudoren’s piece begins by quoting several scabrous statements from Palestinians about Jews and Adolf Hitler, then posits:

These are among dozens of examples highlighted by Israeli officials in a new presentation documenting negative statements about Israel and Jews in official Palestinian Authority media and textbooks. As Secretary of State John Kerry departed here on Monday after an intense four-day push for a framework agreement outlining prospects for a peace deal, Israeli leaders said that such statements had not abated since negotiations began this summer and did not bode well.

Rudoren goes on to say that “Incitement is an issue as old as the conflict itself,” and the Israelis are also accused of it. But the Palestinians’ bill of particulars on alleged Israeli incitement is only two paragraphs in a piece devoted to Israeli charges.

Two other problems:

–According to Youtube settings, and an Arabic-speaking source of mine, the video, above, embedded in Rudoren’s story– “When We Die as Martyrs” — in which children say their blood is nothing next to their connection to Palestine — is from a TV show broadcast out of Bahrain and has no discernible connection to the Palestinian Authority or Hamas, the piece’s central claim;

–The supposedly impartial expert cited in Rudoren’s story–who poohpoohs Israeli incitement as the work of an extremist fringe while emphasizing Palestinian incitement– works for an Israel lobby group, the Washington Institute for Near East Policy, which was spun off from AIPAC and whose advisory board includes Martin Peretz, Joe Lieberman, and Richard Perle. From her piece:

David Pollock, a fellow at the Washington Institute for Near East Policy who in September published a 172-page study of the issue, said that while incitement had decreased markedly since the second intifada, or Palestinian uprising, a decade ago, it persists…

On the Israeli side, Mr. Pollock said, “what you have are unofficial, extremist fringe individuals” whose statements are “disowned and discouraged, for the most part,” by government leaders.

Even the Forward describes WINEP as “a pro-Israel Washington think tank.” Rudoren fails to say so.

On that note, let me bring in co-author Donald Johnson:

Someone from the Washington Institute of Near East Studies is quoted as an objective expert. How any journalist could do this in good faith without giving an opposing view is beyond me. Why not cite someone heavily involved in the BDS movement? You’d probably have a better chance of getting someone honest about the crimes of both sides from some people in the BDS movement than you would from a flack from that thinktank.

But the general problem with the article is that Rudoren equates oppression of Palestinians with Palestinians saying bad things about Israelis; and because (allegedly) the Israeli “incitement” is less bad, the Israelis actually come out looking better overall in this article. The underlying message is that the Israelis are the real victims, because the Palestinians complain bitterly about Israeli oppression.

As for the actual hate speech Rudoren documents, that is bad and common to both sides in almost any war, but the Palestinian hate speech is tacitly assumed to be worse because it is “anti-semitic” and therefore Hitler-like. But Israeli hate speech is never explicitly condemned by anyone cited in her piece in those terms.

“Incitement” is a weasel word. It allows the Times to describe Palestinian complaints about human rights violations as equivalent to hate speech, and worse than the human rights violations themselves. The word as used blends together actual examples of hate speech with legitimate complaints about Israeli atrocities.

For instance, one example of “incitement” is Palestinians calling a brutal Israeli interrogation center the “slaughterhouse”. The piece links to an earlier NYT article by Isabel Kershner that stated that an Israeli study on incitement

found that extreme examples of dehumanization and demonization were “very rare” on both sides. The few examples given included one from an ultra-Orthodox textbook describing an Israeli settlement established on the ruins of an Arab village that “had always been a nest of murderers.” A Palestinian language textbook included a reference to “the slaughterhouse,” explaining it as the nickname prisoners had given to an interrogation center “due to the brutality of the interrogators.”

So the problem here isn’t that maybe the Israelis were torturing prisoners. The problem is that the Palestinian complaint might be exaggerated, unless people actually died under interrogation there (and for all we can tell from the article, maybe they did.) Israeli human rights groups have confirmed that Israel tortures prisoners. So the Palestinian complaint about brutality is almost certainly true, but this allegation of torture at an Israeli interrogation center becomes an example of Israeli victimization by the Palestinians. And it is equated to an Israeli justification for ethnic cleansing– describing an entire Palestinian village as a “nest of murderers”. I.e., The village deserved to be destroyed.

This is a strange sort of symmetry: in which an ultra-Orthodox claim that could have been written by an Islamic extremist to justify an attack on civilians is equated with people complaining about torture. Apparently it doesn’t matter with Palestinians. Whether they use terror or are the victims of terror, what they say and do is the equivalent of terrorism if they make any complaint about the Israelis. Would an Israeli condemnation of a suicide bombing attack be equated to a Hamas comparison of Jews to animals? Somehow I doubt it.

Rudoren meets with American Jewish Committee group

Jodi Rudoren meets with American Jewish Committee group on January 2 in Jerusalem

Donald Johnson

Donald Johnson is a regular commenter on this site, as "Donald."

Other posts by .

Posted In:

41 Responses

  1. Woody Tanaka on January 7, 2014, 3:29 pm

    I can’t say I am surprised. This is the New York Times, afterall, the fanclub newsletter of Big zio, Inc, here in America. Those who thought that maybe Jodi Rudoren would be different were kidding themselves.

  2. LanceThruster on January 7, 2014, 3:49 pm

    Palestinians are sooo evil that they’d have no qualms about incinerating Israeli children with white phosphorus.

    …Wait, what?

  3. pabelmont on January 7, 2014, 3:57 pm

    And (some) Jews teach that non-Jews (including Palestinian non-Jews) are “not quite human.”. Incitement, anybody? I wonder how the Jews who believe this (and who teach it) treat non-Jews and who should be said to be hating (or oppressing) whom?

    • Krauss on January 7, 2014, 7:04 pm

      It is actually hilarious to consider the fact that were was a mass freakout when she was appointed as the Times Bureau chief by the usual suspects(Goldberg etc) for having the temerity to tweet to Ali Abuminah.

      The coverage out of the NYT the last 6 months has been on a neoconservative scale. Whitewashed hogwash after hogwash. Apartheid generals get glowing profiles, photographed in brooding postures and praised as philosopher-kings who must bear The White Jewish Burden of controlling the restless native always causing trouble with their insistance of equality and democracy.

      At this stage I’m more interested in the why rather than what. Why now? Why this hasbara? You saw very critical coverage in the 2010-2012 period. I’m guessing the NYT, seeing Yair Lapid becoming Bibi’s lapdog, has essentially decided that this is as good as it is going to get. And if this is what the “center” in Israel stands for – the status quo – then we cannot criticize it that much any longer. Because our previous criticism was based on getting a regime change, get the liberal Zionists into the government. Well, not all of them are there, but almost 20 MKs are. And the results are the exact same.

      The Times has also been deeply biased against the BDS victories. I think many of their higher-ups, some of whom like Ethan Bronner, are now switching from “we must criticize Israel to save it” into “we must shield it at all costs” mode. Probably because they realize that the left is abandonding the hoax of “liberal” Zionism and going for full equality in one fell swoop and this frightens them, they would no longer control the narrative and push it back into the Zionist hemisphere if the criticism and the critical coverage is being kept up.

  4. seafoid on January 7, 2014, 4:09 pm

    Jewish victims with their nukes and torture chambers and 30K gdp per head and zero self awareness.

  5. Justpassingby on January 7, 2014, 4:12 pm

    For Rudoren and similar zionist/jewish/journalists everything seems to be about Israel/jews/Israel/jews etc etc.

    Now Rudoren blames the victim. Shame on her.

    Besides palestinians “incitement” is nothing to compared to what the occupier/Israel says about non jews.

    • seafoid on January 8, 2014, 4:11 am

      It’s so dangerous for Israeli Jews. The constant fear mongering is designed to silence dissent so that Yesha can keep iterating away. “See – we told you. They all hate us so we must build”.

      And all international support is slowly draining away.

  6. Abierno on January 7, 2014, 4:13 pm

    Obviously, Ms. Rodoren has not read the internationally, well received study by
    Dr. Nurit Elhanan-Peled (yes, the general’s daughter), professor of language and linguistics at Tel Aviv University and David Yellin Teachers College Israel: The
    Representation of Palestinians in Israeili Schoolbooks. It is published in peer revised journals, as a book available on Amazon and as a pdf which can be accessed by simply
    googling the title. It is a well researched, “multimodal analysis of oral, written and visual dicourse” addressing issues of the verbal and visual representation of Palestinians in Israeli Schoolbooks, the representation (or non representation) of
    Palestine in texts, the treatment of Palestinians as “foreigners” in these texts,
    and careful documentaiton of racist verbal and visual discourse. Most important is
    the pushing of non Jewish citizens of Israel to the margins of social consciousness
    and the use of negative stereotypes when they are characterized in Israeli social
    consciousness. This paper also addresses the legitimation and justification of massacres. To quote the conclusion: “Reality is presented in Israeli schoolbooks from the point of view of the dominant Jewish group, who sees Palestinians as a primitive, vile, threatening and undesirable element. The maps conceal Palestinians’ existence and show disregard for international laws and decisions. Human caused
    evils are presented as natural processes and the killing and expelling of the indigenous population is legitimized in the name of the highest cause – the existence of the Jewish state… This [Israeli] education is far from encouraging peace and co- existence.”

    • LeaNder on January 8, 2014, 8:23 am

      Yes, that was on my mind. Obviously Dr. Nurit Elhanan-Peled responded to the constant propaganda drums concerning Palestinian incitement. I have been watching the debate over the decades.

      I think were the report mainly becomes heavily unbalanced is the huge amount of visual documentation for one side only without context. Thus in Israel it is the absolute exception to the rule, while the Palestinians are ultimately some type of neo-Nazis collectively?

      Comments disabled?

      What happened to the compulsory Arab language pilot project? Shouldn’t a bilingual approach have been a rather obvious idea from the start? why did it have to wait till 1997?

  7. Balfour on January 7, 2014, 4:34 pm

    Any coincidence the New York Times ran this story the same day Netanyahu publicly announces the construction of hundreds of new Israeli-only housing units in the Occupied Territories?

    • talknic on January 7, 2014, 9:16 pm

      @ Balfour “Any coincidence..”

      Coincidence is too risky to depend on. The Zionist Movement has had over a hundred years practice at coordinating its propaganda, investing its money and putting its people in the right places to suit its nefarious purposes

    • amigo on January 8, 2014, 5:05 am

      “Any coincidence the New York Times ran this story the same day Netanyahu publicly announces the construction of hundreds of new Israeli-only housing units in the Occupied Territories?”Balfour

      Correction!!!!Hundreds of Israeli “Jews only” housing units.

  8. Reds on January 7, 2014, 4:47 pm

    Wouldn’t this be a perfect example of going to bat for a foreign country?

    Israel P.M. Claimed something to justify illegal settlements and blame the P.A. Then the align “think tank” produces the evidence and hands it off to its respective Hasbara outlet to be uncritically reported. Other MSM picks it up and uncritically repeats it. U.S. Politicians do the same as well and when the peace talks fail. Those same so-called experts who happen to be aligned with the Israeli lobby can point to incitement while briefly mentioning those illegal settlement(nothing on Israeli incitement) as the main cause and the MSM dutifully repeats. Sure the talking points are ready to go after the peace talks failures .

  9. gracie fr on January 7, 2014, 4:51 pm

    Maybe the NYTs is taking the current play book strategy of the French government’ in its efforts to ban performances by the comedian Dieudonné M’Bala M’Bala, accused by officialdom of anti-semitic incitement and deriding the Holocaust. It has worked like a charm…..

  10. Reds on January 7, 2014, 4:56 pm

    Also most of the stuff is from menri, pally watch, atlas shrug

  11. oneof5 on January 7, 2014, 5:53 pm

    Another problem with the article – Rudoren writes:

    “On the Nov. 2 anniversary of the Balfour Declaration of 1917, in which Britain endorsed the idea of a Jewish state in Palestine,”

    That’s not what Balfour says … it speaks of “the establishment in Palestine of a national home for the Jewish people”

    I emailed them and pointed the error and requested that they correct it.

    • Citizen on January 8, 2014, 7:21 am

      @ oneof5
      Good catch. Let us know if you get a response.

    • Balfour on January 8, 2014, 10:27 am

      “…I emailed them and pointed [out] the error, and requested that they correct it”

      Oneof5: let’s see if you have the same clout as CAMERA in getting the New York Times to publish corrections.

  12. Henry Norr on January 7, 2014, 6:44 pm

    Donald Johnson notes that Rudoren’s latest piece “links to an earlier NYT article by Isabel Kershner” about an earlier “Israeli study on incitement,” which cited the Israeli textbook referring to a demolished Palestinian village as a “nest of murderers” and the Palestinian textbook quoting prisoners who nicknamed the interrogation center where they were held “the slaughterhouse.”

    I certainly agree with Donald that equating these two examples is ridiculous. But
    a) it’s not entirely accurate to describe the study Kershner wrote about in that piece (published Feb. 3, 2013) as “Israeli.” Here’s some of what she said about it”

    The report was commissioned by the Council of Religious Institutions of the Holy Land, a group of Christian, Jewish and Muslim leaders who advocate for mutual respect and understanding. It was financed by a grant from the United States State Department.

    The research was led by two prominent academics with long experience in textbook studies, Daniel Bar-Tal, an Israeli professor of research in child development and education at Tel Aviv University, and Sami Adwan, a Palestinian associate professor of education at Bethlehem University.

    The project was originated by Dr. Bruce E. Wexler, professor emeritus of psychiatry at the Yale School of Medicine, who co-founded an organization to promote Israeli-Palestinian cooperation.

    I went to the website of the Council of Religious Institutions of the Holy Land, which says that the group’s establishment “followed on from the historic first ever meeting of religious leaders from the Holy Land that took place in Alexandria, Egypt, in 2002, initiated by the then Archbishop of Canterbury and hosted by the Grand Imam of Al Azhar.”

    In short, doesn’t sound like it makes sense to call that study (which I haven’t read) “Israeli,” whatever else one might want to say about it.

    b) Donald’s excerpt and comments don’t convey what to my mind was most interesting about Kershner’s February article: despite the false equivalences, the study it reported actually contradicted the usual Zionist line, the one Rudoren is pushing today. The headline sums it up: “Academic Study Weakens Israeli Claim That Palestinian School Texts Teach Hate,” and Kershner’s lede reinforced the point, concluding “it undermines recent assertions by the Israeli government that Palestinian children are educated “to hate.””

    For that very reason, the story reported,

    Israel’s Ministry of Education issued a statement in late January [i.e., the previous week, just ahead of the study’s release] dismissing the new research as “biased, unprofessional and significantly lacking in objectivity.” Referring to “bodies that wish to slander the Israeli education system and the state of Israel,” it said the findings were “predetermined” and did not “reliably reflect reality.”

    Awful as Kershner’s reporting usually is, and wishy-washy as that report may be, I’ll bet the Israelis were’t happy to see the way the Times reported it.

    In fact, I wouldn’t be surprised if Rudoren’s story today and the Times’ posting of the government’s slides is at least in part an attempt on the paper’s part to make it up to the Israelis and the lobby for that earlier piece. Now that Netanyahu is choosing to make “incitement” a big (pseudo-)issue, they probably didn’t want that Kershner story to remain the most recent major piece on the subject in the archives of the “paper of record.”

    • Donald on January 7, 2014, 7:11 pm

      ” despite the false equivalences, the study it reported actually contradicted the usual Zionist line, the one Rudoren is pushing today. ”

      I had something on that in my original version, but Phil and I cut it. I thought it was a confused mess in its original form because I was covering too much. But I did send the original version to Margaret Sullivan, the NYT public editor, because I knew the NYT would see that Kershner article as pro-Palestinian. What bothered me is precisely what you see as a good point–that the earlier article is framed as critical of Israel and yes, the Israelis weren’t happy with it. But that’s because they want every last detail framed just as they wish it to be. And yet, if you read through this ostensibly critical article which made the Israelis unhappy, the NYT is equating legitimate Palestinian grievances with Israeli apologetics for war crimes.
      And that’s in the article which is ostensibly favorable to the Palestinians. Do you see the problem? It’s depressing to me that I have to point this out, but I guess that shows how effective this form of propaganda is. I don’t even know if it is consciously done. Maybe the NYT editors and reporters are so immersed in the pro-Israeli viewpoint they honestly think they are giving a story a pro-Palestinian slant if they don’t adhere scrupulously to the Israeli spin on every aspect of a story. Maybe they read “the Israelis tortured us” as exactly as hateful as “that Palestinian village was inhabited by murderers and deserved to be destroyed”. Maybe they do, but if so I don’t feel inclined to give them praise for their alleged good intentions.

      As for the original study, I haven’t seen it. I would be amazed if the writers were as clueless as Kershner, but anything is possible. My emphasis was on Kershner and the NYT, because I doubt too many NYT readers have read the study.

  13. Jerome Slater on January 7, 2014, 7:19 pm

    Well done, Phil and Donald. I would add this: Rudoren prints without comment the statement of a Netanyahu govt. official who claims that Israeli incitement can’t be compared with that of the Palestinians, because Israeli nastiness comes from “rogue individuals,” whereas the Palestinian “incitement” comes from govt. sources. Rudoren fails to note that the Palestinians, the victims, mostly throw words at the Israelism, whereas the Israeli “rogue individuals” shoot, beat, and destroy Palestinian homes and orchards. And since the police and army–the oppressors– do next to nothing to stop the rampages of the settlers, that means the violence is de facto government policy.

  14. American on January 7, 2014, 8:22 pm …….and download the pdf that shows what Israel is using to claim incitement.

    Some of it you have really stretch to call it incitement.

    • Bumblebye on January 7, 2014, 9:00 pm

      Tried the link twice. “403 forbidden”. Something’s wrong!

      • Hostage on January 8, 2014, 12:47 am

        Tried the link twice. “403 forbidden”. Something’s wrong!

        I think this is the link to the document in question:

      • lyn117 on January 8, 2014, 2:53 am

        I don’t know about the Hitler quotes. The first one, “Do not argue with a fool…” seems to actually be a biblical quote. The rest look more like common aphorisms or sayings. Not saying Hitler never quoted the bible, but the list seems pretty weird.

  15. RoHa on January 7, 2014, 8:49 pm

    And Gentiles are the real victims, because Jews complain bitterly about anti-Semitism.

  16. American on January 7, 2014, 8:58 pm

    ”Rudoren prints without comment the statement of a Netanyahu govt. official who claims that Israeli incitement can’t be compared with that of the Palestinians, because Israeli nastiness comes from “rogue individuals,” whereas the Palestinian “incitement” comes from govt. sources”

    Yea, I guess a deputy minister who still has his job after declaring how inferior souls of gentiles are is just fringe and not official……LOL
    If they arent fired when they say these things then it is “official”
    You’ll never see the NYT report of this stuff…..or any of the absolute racist things Isr officials say all the time about Palestines.

    link to

    Gay Jews have ‘higher souls’ than gentiles, says deputy minister

    Habayit Hayehudi’s Rabbi Eli Ben Dahan says same-sex marriage is prohibited just as marriage between Jews and gentiles is.
    Homosexual Jews have “higher souls” than gentiles, gay or straight, the deputy minister for religious services told the Israeli daily Maariv in an article published on Friday. ”

  17. Oscar on January 7, 2014, 9:26 pm

    Wow. Jodi rodoren, who promised everyone, PROMISED everyone, that when she would take on this assignment, she would be neutral. And she writes this tripe, as if she is an objective journalist. She is horrible, a hasbarist, a paycheck grabbing, Zionist, bullshit artist, who lied and lied when she took on this assignment, and is worse than her biased predecessors all of whom sucked. Jodi, since there are no comments allowed on your NYT articles, I’m sure you check out Mondoweiss. As a citizen of the world, you are despicable.

  18. Binyamin in Orangeburg on January 7, 2014, 10:11 pm

    Official Racism in Israel

    1. Legalizing Housing Discrimination in Israel:
    2011 Knesset Approves Bill Allowing Segregation in Housing (the “Acceptance to [Jewish] Communities Law”). Allows admissions committees in communities of 400 homes or less located in two less populated regions to reject applicants for “social unsuitability.”

    One third of communities in those regions already qualify and with a little clever repackaging, all Jewish communities could qualify.

    Israel Supreme Court Ruling Allowing Jewish-Only Housing

    (MK David Rotem (Yisrael Beiteinu), responded to claims the bill was meant to reject Arabs from joining Israeli towns. “In my opinion, every Jewish town needs at least one Arab. What would happen if my refrigerator stopped working on a Saturday?”

    2. Suppressing Arab Dissent

    The “Nakba Law” authorizes the Minister of Finance to cut off state funding to any school, town or state-funded arts organization that has made any payment towards an event or action that marks the date of Israel’s establishment “as a day of mourning.”

    3. Ethnic Cleasing of Jerusalem

    Number of buildings permits granted to Jews in Jerusalem (2008): 13,941 (about 20% in Arab neighborhoods of occupied East Jerusalem).
    Number of building permits granted to East Jerusalem Arabs (to build in Arab neighborhoods only, of course): 400 units.
    Ergo, although Arabs make up one third of the citizenry of Jerusalem, they comprise 2.8% of the housing permit grantees.$File/full_report.pdf

    4. More Housing Segregation

    Israeli Arabs Denied Housing Permits:

    State-Funded Rabbi Who Issued Fatwa Against Renting Apartments to Arabs Gets Government Award:
    Minister of Science and Technology Daniel Hershkowitz awarded Eliyahu with the prize for “his actions, efforts and devotion to the Jewish nature of the Land of Israel.”

    5. Apartheid Marriage Laws
    Israel’s Apartheid Marriage Law Is Upheld By High Court 1/11/2011

    6. Proposed Additional Laws Discriminating Against Arabs

    Knesset Proposes “Loyalty and Citizenship Law” That Would Strip Arabs of Rights

    List of Knesset Proposed Laws that Discriminate Against Arabs:

    7. School Textbooks Create a New Generation of Haters
    Israeli Scholar Documents Incitement Against Palestinians in Israel’s Textbooks

    8. Miscellaneous Racism
    Apartheid Parking Lots In Jerusalem (No Joke)

    Up Until 2011 No Israeli Arab Could Be A Dairy or Poultry Farmer (Again, No Joke)

    Government Ministry Warns Jewish Girls of Sex-Crazed Arab Doctors:
    Channel 10’s main news broadcast last Wednesday evening reported that the National Civilian Service Administration had ordered its religiously observant women volunteers not to work after 9 P.M. According to the news broadcast, this decision was made by the Lehava anti-assimilation organization after “reports were received about intimate relationships between young women performing their national service and Arab physicians in the hospitals where they volunteered,” as reported on the Nana 10 online portal. The website quoted one of the rabbis as having said in the past, “I’m hearing horrible stories about good girls.” The head of the National Civilian Service Administration made sure to mention that the decision was made with the blessing of the minister in charge, Naftali Bennett.

    And let us not forget the events of October 2000, when police used lethal ammunition to disperse Palestinian-Arab citizens of Israel who were throwing stones, resulting in thirteen fatalities.

    “[Upper Nazareth Mayor Shimon] Gapso told the paper that if he had been present during the October 2000 clashes between Israeli Arabs and police, more Arabs would have been killed. He also said his city would never become a mixed Arab-Jewish city, although 16 percent of its residents were Arab, and that a mosque would never go up in his city.”

    Part II – Unofficial Racism
    A-Speeches by political leaders invoking racism:
    From Binyamin Netanyahu’s 2003 speech to the Herzliya Conference, while he was the Finance Minister: “We have a demographic problem, but it is focused not on the Arabs of Palestine but on the Arabs of Israel.” He explained: “If the Arab residents become wonderfully integrated and their numbers reach 35 percent to 40 percent of the total population, the Jewish state will be canceled out and become a bi-national state. If their number remains around 20 percent as it is today, or even declines, but relations are harsh and contentious, then, too, the democratic fabric of our argument will be impaired.”

    Deputy Prime Minister of Israel Danny Ayalon Proposes Ethnic Cleansing of Israel’s Arab Citizens Under Guise of ‘Population Transfer’
    Ha’aretz 13/02/2010

    Interior Minister says Israel Belongs to ‘The White Man’, Not African Asylum Seekers

    Housing Minister: Spread of Arab population must be stopped: July 1, 2009

    Knesset MK Says Arabs Are An Economic Burden on Israel

    Likud MK Says “the Palestinians” Are “Worms”

    Rightist MK’s campaign posters of an Israeli Arab woman with caption: “This demographic will kill us.”
    Shas Rabbi Says Black Immigrants Must Be Expelled Because They Bring ‘Robbery, Violence and Sodomy’,7340,L-4237739,00.html

  19. Hostage on January 8, 2014, 12:43 am

    Today she has an article putting forward the Israeli view that certain Palestinian statements about Israel constitute “incitement” of hatred– and that’s why Palestinians don’t deserve a state.

    Maybe she has something there. After all, Bush and Blair carried on a deliberate campaign of incitement to stir-up support for a war of aggression against the nation of Iraq and it caused hundreds of thousands of needless killings, atrocities, and made millions of people refugees.

    When the fact that they had fabricated so-called “intelligence” reports was revealed, they denied and trivialized what they had done and asked the public to condone it.

    That testimony would have gotten others arrested for hate speech under the applicable UK laws.

    Here’s what the rest of the world has to say:

    The United States is the greatest threat to world peace. That’s the finding of an end-of-the- year, WIN/Gallup International survey of people in 65 countries.

    Of the 66,000 people polled, just under a quarter named Uncle Sam as the greatest threat to world peace.

    Other menaces didn’t even come close: 8 percent named Pakistan, putting that country in second place, while 6 percent named China. A mere 4 percent found Iran threatening — which tied it with Israel.

    As we were reading the results, we couldn’t help thinking we had seen it all before. And when we looked, we found a 2006 Pew Research Center poll of 17,000 people from 15 different countries that found something very similar: More people thought the US intervention in Iraq a threat to world peace than Iran.

    — January 5th 2014 US is the greatest threat to world peace: poll,

    • seafoid on January 8, 2014, 4:01 am

      “certain Palestinian statements about Israel constitute “incitement” of hatred– and that’s why Palestinians don’t deserve a state.”

      I wasn’t aware of any aspect of international law that determined that any act of incitement by any member of a national group negates the rights of self determination of the entire group.

      • Hostage on January 8, 2014, 5:54 am

        I wasn’t aware of any aspect of international law that determined that any act of incitement by any member of a national group negates the rights of self determination of the entire group.

        It applies to Israelis too. The Palestinian statements in this case were from a so-called “Palestinian Authority Incitement Index”. So this is a call for non-recognition and regime change. States as persons of international law are composite entities made up of a population, a government, and a territory. International law has dealt with the subject of regime change and the break-up or division of territories on a number of occasions.

        It may be hard to believe, but at least in theory, self-determination does not give any population, political entity, or regime the right to self determine that it will violate jus cogens prohibitions against the use of force, piracy, genocide, slavery, racial discrimination, apartheid, torture, the rules of international humanitarian law, cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment, crimes against humanity, the right of others to exercise self-determination and permanent sovereignty over their natural resources.

        For years, the ILC has grappled with the principle of State responsibility for internationally wrongful acts, i.e. international crimes and international delicts See Articles 18, 19, et seq

        § 2o2(2) of the Restatement of the Foreign Relations Law of the United States, “Recognition and Acceptance of States” says:

        A state has an obligation not to recognize or treat as a state an entity that has attained the qualifications for statehood [i.e. territory, population, or control of the government] as a result of a threat or use of force in violation of the United Nations Charter

        Art. 41(2) of the Articles of the International Law Commission (ILC) on the Responsibility of States for Internationally Wrongful Acts provides that ‘no State shall recognize as lawful a situation created by a serious breach of an obligation arising under a peremptory norm of general international law.

        The advisory opinion of the International Court of Justice (ICJ) on the Wall in the Occupied Palestinian Territory (2004) was a prominent example of the obligation of non-recognition as laid down by the ILC. At some point a regime that has created a multitude of illegal situations will eventually delegitimize itself and no longer have the right to exist or to recognition.

  20. spokelse on January 8, 2014, 1:05 am

    The main issue for me is that there is no mention of the US supported settler colonial project, the typical “two equal sides” context, no background. The implicit message is that the Palestinians need to be more compliant/grateful occupied people. Thus there is a deep level of imperial/colonial delusion at play here.

  21. Hostage on January 8, 2014, 1:11 am

    On the Israeli side, Mr. Pollock said, “what you have are unofficial, extremist fringe individuals” whose statements are “disowned and discouraged, for the most part,” by government leaders.

    How official does it have to get, when the ruling Coalition Chairman, MK Yariv Levin (Likud), tables a bill on a Basic Law for the Courts to use as a constitutional law, that asserts “The right to realize national self-definition in the State of Israel is unique to the Jewish people.” and that it even trumps the principle of Democracy? See Lawmakers to debate proposal giving Jews ‘unique’ right to self-determination in Israel: MK Yariv Levin submits extreme version of existing proposal that would give courts the right to prioritize Jewish identity over democracy in rulings that address issues of religion and state.

    Here are some more examples of incitement contained in the constitutional proposal

    Levin’s law establishes Hebrew as the only official language in the state but allows the Knesset to grant a secondary status to other languages, including Arabic or English. Another provision, copied over from Dichter’s proposed law, obligates the state to build Jewish communities in its territories, with resources allocated specifically for this purpose. As for communities for non-Jews, the state will have the power to grant approval for their construction.

    The coalition agreement Habayit Hayehudi signed with Likud calls for enacting such legislation.

  22. seafoid on January 8, 2014, 4:55 am

    It is amazing that 40 years on from Civil rights in the US Zionist Jews are spinning this incitement trash in the NYT as a reason to deny Palestinians their rights. Can you imagine Bull Connor today on Morning Joe saying that Alabama African Americans are grumpy and often say mean things about whites so they don’t deserve to vote or have social security ?

  23. a blah chick on January 8, 2014, 9:18 am

    I can recall an interview on NPR, I think, about twenty years ago with a retired Israeli general. The interviewer asked him about Palestinian allegations of abuse and the man replied, no doubt with a knowing grin and steepled fingers, that one cannot rely on the Palestinians to be honest about Israel.

    So, there it is. If you want the truth about what is going there don’t ask a actual Arab, they can’t be honest with you. Go to the nearest Israeli Jew because they have no reason to lie to you.

    • SQ Debris on January 8, 2014, 2:11 pm

      Blah chick points out an important trope: If you want to know about the Holocaust don’t ask a German. If you want to know about the Nakba or the occupation, don’t ask a Palestinian. In the U.S. the voices of Jews are the only recognized authority on the victimization of Jews, or victimization by zionists. That’s not to say that the trope isn’t disgusting and racist, but it is a fact on the ground. That’s why Max’s “Goliath” is so discomfitting. Lifting strong non-zio voices like Phil’s and others on this list into public consciousness is a way to turn that racist bias on itself. It is a tactical imperative.

  24. Tom Callaghan on January 8, 2014, 9:43 am

    I read Jodi’s piece this morning. Pathetic. Apparently she’s moved to Jerusalem to
    carry water for Bibi’s latest reason for continuing settlement activity, avoiding peace with Palestinians and keeping the peace with the far right wing Rabbis without whom Bibi cannot stay in power.

    Blumenthal addresses this head on in his Chapter entitled How to Kill Goyim and Influence People. If Jodi wants some incitement excitement she can spend some time with the folks that think Operation Cast Lead was a proud moment in Israel’s history.

  25. Talkback on January 8, 2014, 5:04 pm

    Rudoren: The presentation, which Mr. Steinitz delivered at an Israeli cabinet meeting on Sunday, is part of an intensifying campaign in which he, Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and others have emphasized what they call “incitement” as a prime obstacle to peace.

    Rudoren’s article is part of the same campaign.

    And for ther to claim that Balfour declaration endorsed a Jewish “state” in Palestine and that the United Nations voted to “partition” Palestine (and not to only recommend it) would be “incitement”, too.

    Why can’t Abbas provide a report of the same (and probably even more) and give the hypocrit Hasbara imbeciles some of their own medicine? Probably because they are not interested in creating fake obstacles for peace.

  26. Talkback on January 8, 2014, 5:28 pm

    Peter Beinhart has a quite balanced article in Haaretz on the same topic:

    See how different it is from Rudoren’s article who lives in a self delusional state of mind in which she is not a propagandist, but an unbiased journalist.

Leave a Reply