Next Monday, there’s a debate about Israel’s policies at Columbia University that features three Zionists, and no Palestinian. Hussein Ibish, the Lebanese-American author who works for a two-state Palestinian group, will join liberal Zionist Peter Beinart, in opposing two neoconservatives, in a debate at the Diana Center at Barnard.
Columbia University Debate: “Are Israel’s Policies Justified in Light of the Security Issues it Faces?”
Join us for a powerful debate on Israel’s policies as they relate to security threats facing the country. The debate is being put on as a partnership with the Columbia International Relations Council and Association (CIRCA), Mayanot and This World: The Values Network.
America’s Rabbi and bestselling author, Rabbi Shmuley Boteach, along with Wall Street Journal Foreign Affairs columnist, Bret Stephens, will debate against Hussein Ibish, Senior Fellow at the American Task Force on Palestine, along with author and political commentator, Peter Beinart.
This is more evidence of the complete polarization of the issue, with mainstream groups carrying on a conversation in which Israel is a model democracy and grassroots groups having a conversation in which Israel is losing legitimacy. It’s about time the mainstream reflects that powerful grassroots criticism. (Beinart will voice it by proxy, in disagreeing with it.)
Who’s sponsoring this debate? This World is the shop of Shmuley Boteach, a giant self-promoter (America’s Rabbi). Mayanot appears to be this Zionist organization. But the Columbia International Relations Council and Association (CIRCA), would seem to have a neutral mission.
CIRCA’s mission, as articulated in the preamble of the constitution, is “entrenched in its principles, and manifested in all of its activities. The central goals are of an educational nature, particularly with regards to engaging with the world, its numerous cultures, social and political systems, in hopes of fostering a deeper understanding and active cooperation among people of all backgrounds.
Why are they staging such an imbalanced debate?
Sure, but show Five Broken Cameras without approved zionist rebuttal and all hell breaks loose.
Keeping in mind Hitler’s plan to deport Jews to Madagascar and Bishop Desmond Tutu’s observation that South Africa’s apartheid sought to exploit blacks whereas Israel’s apartheid seeks to eliminate Palestinians, comes this Guardian headline, “Plan to transfer Arab-Israelis to new Palestinian state seeks legal approval.”
http://www.theguardian.com/world/2014/mar/25/transfer-arab-israeli-citizens-palestinian-state
Yes, unbalanced people. But also a weird topic: “Are Israel’s Policies Justified in Light of the Security Issues it Faces?”
Maybe Columbia Law School (at SJP’s request? or sua sponte?) could have a conference on a slightly different topic: “Are Israel’s Policies Justified in Light of International Law?”
Shmuley’s claim to be America’s Rabbi is complete BS. **I** am America’s Rabbi, as of now.
nyc is a very insular society…
if one wants to see how much so…
go to Nathaniel Kahn’s film about his old man…Lou Kahn, “My Architect”…and then go to the part where Nathan interviews Lou Kahn’s first cousin…the guy is some kind of recluse sitting in his house speaking yiddish…of course it probably is Philadelphia but so what huh? The guy never knew about Lou’s son or much about him…said Lou died bankrupt (true)…but his cousin was so isolated he had no idea of the impact of Lou Kahn…
actually quite humorous…
of course if you want to he a hermit in a big city in the USA it’s covered by the Constitution as well as some guy living on a mountain Idaho…
something obviously missed by the Simon Wiesenthal Center in LA when the describe Israel as almost a US State…EXCEPT of adherence to the rule of law and certain provisions in the US CONSTITUTION
Nathaniel Kahn ain’t jewish and Lou Kahn wasn’t much either…