Trending Topics:

‘New York Times’ cites Palestinians as ‘demographic’ threat

on 65 Comments

Today in a news article, the New York Times described Palestinian refugees as posing a “demographic death warrant” to Israel. The article is about Israel’s response to the boycott movement, which supports the right of return of refugees:

Most Israeli Jews, as well as many outside experts, see either such a one-state solution or the return of all refugees and their descendants as a demographic death warrant for Israel as a Jewish state, which is how it was founded in 1948.

Written by Jerusalem bureau chief Jodi Rudoren, that line drew harsh criticism from our community. Natasha Barakat:

Did @rudoren really refer to children as a “demographic death warrant”? I’m shocked.

Ali Abunimah:

In what circumstances would you consider it acceptable to call presence of Jews a “death warrant” to ANYTHING?

Dan Cohen tweeted the photo above:

Rania Khalek:

It’s unacceptable that you refer to the mere existence of Palestinians as destructive threat that brings with it death

Jodi Rudoren has responded to Khalek that she wasn’t saying that the right of return is a death warrant for Jews, but for the Jewish state.

People who closely follow the conflict know that the “demographic threat” argument for preserving Israel is widely considered racist. The argument is that Israel must take pains to establish a Palestinian state alongside it because otherwise Jews will cease to be a majority in the lands under their dominion (they probably already are a minority), and therefore that the Jewish character of the state will be at risk.

Of course, anyone who used such language in the United States to refer to black people or Jews or Muslims, or any other minority threatening the white or Christian character of anything would lose their job in an instant.

But Israel is always different; after all, it was founded on the premise of establishing a “strong Jewish majority” so as to be the homeland of the Jewish people. Two years ago Barack Obama called for the two-state solution, saying:

Given the demographics west of the Jordan River, the only way for Israel to endure and thrive as a Jewish and democratic state is through the realization of an independent and viable Palestine.

No, he didn’t say “threat” (let alone “death warrant”) but the liberal Zionist leader Jeremy Ben-Ami has: he wrote of ” the inexorable demographic threat to Israel’s future as a democratic state that remains the homeland for the Jewish people.”

But the awareness that you shouldn’t use such language is beginning to break on some folks in the mainstream– if not the New York Times. Here’s a Guardian profile today of B’Tselem’s Hagai El-Ad, by Eve Fairbanks:

When I asked El-Ad whether he thought a moral society in Israel could remain Jewish, it was the closest I ever saw him to expressing anger. “I think the narrowing of Jewish identity to demographics – that’s profoundly un-Jewish,” he snapped. “When you build a wall in this city to expunge, reject, thousands of people on a demographic basis, that’s un-Jewish.”

“What is Jewish?” I asked.

“Treating people with dignity,” he answered. “I think that’s enough.”

And here’s liberal Zionist Daniel Levy on the ugliness of the phrase, four years ago:

“[Avigdor] Lieberman is the bastard child of the demographic analysis of why we need to end the occupation, you cannot treat the Palestinian Arab public as a demographic threat and advocate full equality inside Israel.”
It’s about time that the New York Times reflected this understanding.

philweiss
About Philip Weiss

Philip Weiss is Founder and Co-Editor of Mondoweiss.net.

Other posts by .


Posted In:

65 Responses

  1. amigo
    amigo on June 1, 2015, 11:33 am

    “Most Israeli Jews, as well as many outside experts, see either such a one-state solution or the return of all refugees and their descendants as a demographic death warrant for Israel as a Jewish state, which is how it was founded in 1948. ” rudoren.

    Care to name the outside experts Jodi.

    Or perhaps you could publish a similar article complete with image of “Jewish children” presented as a demographic threat to Palestinians.That would only represent the facts given the zionist penchant for land theft and ethnic cleansing of Palestinians , albeit slow .

    The woman has no shame or humanity.

    • on June 1, 2015, 12:57 pm

      The outside “experts” are Jodi and her crowd.

    • bintbiba
      bintbiba on June 2, 2015, 4:42 pm

      Dan ,
      Thank you so much for that beautiful photo of those 4 little boys. Their mischievous smiles bring a ray of sunshine into the heart !

      When one thinks how very little those kids have to smile about after their childhood innocence has been viciously robbed off them by the horrors deposited onto them and their families…. they still have the capacity to smile and look teasingly into your kind camera.

      This picture seems to have been truly lovingly taken . Speaks tons of soul !

  2. joemowrey
    joemowrey on June 1, 2015, 11:37 am

    “Today in a news article,…”

    “News” article? Hardly. Rudorin doesn’t engage in journalism or reporting. She is a paid propagandist. This was just another of her propaganda pieces disguised as news.

    Thanks, as always, for your careful reporting (actual journalism!) calling the Times to task. But language referring to its content is important. Call a spade a spade. Call propaganda propaganda, not news.

    • CigarGod
      CigarGod on June 2, 2015, 8:58 am

      Exactly, because The Zionists certainly do call out everyone’s counter-arguments… as propaganda.

  3. JLewisDickerson
    JLewisDickerson on June 1, 2015, 11:46 am

    RE “Of course, anyone who used such language in the United States to refer to black people or Jews or Muslims, or any other minority threatening the white or Christian character of anything would lose their job in an instant.” ~ Weiss

    MY COMMENT: I guess Phil is assuming that “former U.S. Marine” Jon Ritzheimer didn’t really have a job to lose (much like Pamela Geller).

  4. eljay
    eljay on June 1, 2015, 11:47 am

    … Most Israeli Jews, as well as many outside experts, see either such a one-state solution or the return of all refugees and their descendants as a demographic death warrant for Israel as a Jewish state, which is how it was founded in 1948. …

    Israel should never have been founded as a religion-supremacist “Jewish State” – a state primarily of and for Jewish Israelis and non-Israeli Jews. (No state should be founded or exist as a supremacist state.)

    But it’s never too late to right that wrong and transform Israel into a secular and democratic Israeli state – a state of and for all of its Israeli citizens, immigrants, expats and refugees, equally.

    (“Most Israeli Jews” might “see a one-state solution or the return of all refugees and their descendants as a demographic death warrant for Israel as a Jewish state”, but their Zio-supremacism compels them to keep engaging in or supporting the theft, occupation and colonization of as much Palestinian land (i.e., land outside of Israel’s / Partition borders) as possible, thereby rendering a viable two-state solution all but impossible.)

  5. Donald
    Donald on June 1, 2015, 12:03 pm

    I read the Guardian piece about B’Tselem. Nothing new really. We knew the terrorist attacks on Israelis during the Second Intifada turned many liberal Zionists into people who don’t care how many Palestinian civilians they killed. I didn’t see a single recognition that the Palestinian civilian death toll was higher during the Second Intifada. And unfortunately the piece itself said nothing about this fact either. I momentarily thought of sending a link to this piece to a friend, but decided against it. It does show (what we have all heard many times) that the so-called Israeli left mostly died because of the terrorism, but without pointing out that at every moment in the conflict Palestinian civilians were being killed in larger numbers, even before the suicide bombing began. I think my friend would actually think his views were validated by what the former liberals say in the Guardian piece.

    In other words, even this report, interesting as it was, had too much false balance. Yes, we should know what the Israelis say, but the numbers don’t lie and the numbers tell us who does the vast majority of the civilian killing.

    • JLewisDickerson
      JLewisDickerson on June 1, 2015, 12:16 pm

      RE: “I read the Guardian piece about B’Tselem. Nothing new really. We knew the terrorist attacks on Israelis during the Second Intifada turned many liberal Zionists into people who don’t care how many Palestinian civilians they killed.”

      SEE: “The Dogs of War: The Next Intifada”, By Uri Avnery, Counterpunch, 9/03/11

      [EXCERPT] . . . The second (“al-Aqsa”) intifada started after the breakdown of the 2000 Camp David conference and Ariel Sharon’s deliberately provocative “visit” to the Temple Mount. The Palestinians held non-violent mass demonstrations. The army responded with selective killings. A sharpshooter accompanied by an officer would take position in the path of the protest, and the officer would point out selected targets – protesters who looked like “ringleaders”. They were killed.
      This was highly effective. Soon the non-violent demonstrations ceased and were replaced by very violent (“terrorist”) actions. With those the army was back on familiar ground. . .

      ENTIRE COMMENTARY – http://www.counterpunch.org/2011/09/02/the-next-intifada/

      • Donald
        Donald on June 1, 2015, 12:33 pm

        Yeah, I can sympathize with the fear of terrorist attacks. What I can’t sympathize with is the stupid narcissistic hypocrisy of thes so called disillusioned leftists who pretend not to know that Israel was killing civilians in large numbers before the suicide bombing campaign began.
        And that bad as that campaign was, the Israelis consistently killed more civilians at every stage.

  6. Boomer
    Boomer on June 1, 2015, 12:15 pm

    It isn’t only the NYT. We hardly need to discuss the WSJ, and WaPo is not much better, if at all. Consider Weymouth’s tone here. The Palestinians’ desire to set a deadline for Israeli troop withdrawal is a forbidden “precondition,” while Israel’s rejection of foreign troops in lieu of its own is a “red line,” which is evidently acceptable.
    http://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/a-new-two-state-strategy-for-peace/2015/05/31/31330f4c-06da-11e5-bc72-f3e16bf50bb6_story.html?hpid=z3

  7. hophmi
    hophmi on June 1, 2015, 12:24 pm

    “People who closely follow the conflict know that the “demographic threat” argument for preserving Israel is widely considered racist.”

    It’s only considered racist by the BDS movement, and only because it’s a nice political way for them to divert people from questioning their own privilege of living in homogeneous Western states that are not involved in land conflicts, to avoid the obvious hypocrisy of pro-Palestinian activists who complain about an argument they make all the time when the other side makes it, and to ignore the fact that the history of forcing people of two different ethnicities who dislike one another together in the same state is extremely bloody, and a disaster almost everywhere it’s been tried. In reality, the Palestinians used the exact same reasoning to attempt to restrict Jews from emigrating to Palestine in the first half of the 20th century, and use it today to argue that a Palestinian state should essentially be Judenrein; we can’t have all these Jews here because their very presence threatens us and keeps us from creating the ethnic Palestinian state that we want, where Muslims will essentially be more equal than others are.

    In any event, the outrage over Rudoren’s story is very much manufactured, and completely fake. Anyone with basic reading skills understands that Rudoren is simply reporting the viewpoint of Israeli Jews, and not necessarily adopting their view. The reaction of political activists like Rania Khalek will not fool her or anyone else who has a modicum of integrity.

    • on June 1, 2015, 1:02 pm

      “It’s only considered racist by the BDS movement.”

      Any source for this assertion? I consider it quite obviously racist and I am not in the BDS movement.

      “Anyone with basic reading skills understands that Rudoren is simply reporting the viewpoint of Israeli Jews, and not necessarily adopting their view -”

      Is this what journalists do? Report the viewpoint of a group of people without disclosing that is what he or she is doing?

      A “modicum of integrity”?

      Jesus hophimi. You’re a pedantic ass even without the Zionism.

    • oldgeezer
      oldgeezer on June 1, 2015, 1:42 pm

      ” Anyone with basic reading skills understands that Rudoren is simply reporting the viewpoint of Israeli Jews, and not necessarily adopting their view. – See more at: http://mondoweiss.net/2015/06/demographic-argument-questioning#comment-771394

      Totally false. If that had been her intent she would have pointed that out in her twitter response instead of explaining she meant the Jewish state. She did seek to hide her views as if they were views of others though.

      No the argument against immigation from other parts of the world into Palestine in 48 is not remotely similar to the argument being made to prevent people from returning to the land where they lived and property that they owned.

      I haven’t seen any accurate quotes about keeping a new Palestinian would be off limits for Jews (couldn’t resist using the nazi phrase could you hop… Even when it’s Israel trying out the same practice) but that it would be free from Israelis. With settlers being allowed to adopt Palestinian nationality if they obey their laws. Entirely reasonable to not want Israelis in your country after 70 years of theft and oppression. Nice try at conflating Israel with Jews. Jewish people are equal to others. Israel is a two bit rogue state.

      btw…. What homogenous western countries are you referring to?

    • amigo
      amigo on June 1, 2015, 1:58 pm

      “People who closely follow the conflict know that the “demographic threat” argument for preserving Israel is widely considered racist.” hopknee

      You sound like rudoren and her “outside experts”.

      “In any event, the outrage over Rudoren’s story is very much manufactured, and completely fake. Anyone with basic reading skills understands that Rudoren is simply reporting the viewpoint of Israeli Jews, and not necessarily adopting their view. ” hopknee.

      Show me one article by rudoren where she reports the view of Palestinians, (fat chance of that ever happening) and omits the zionist view.Surely the nyt has non Israeli Jews amongst it,s readers.

      Just one hopknee.

      As to Palestinians wanting a Judenrein state, that is a lie.They want a state free of Israeli citizens and that includes non Jews.You see they are forbidden by the 4th GC to be squatting in Palestine.

    • annie
      annie on June 1, 2015, 1:59 pm

      In reality, the Palestinians used the exact same reasoning….. and use it today to argue that a Palestinian state should essentially be Judenrein – See more at: http://mondoweiss.net/2015/06/demographic-argument-questioning/comment-page-1#comment-771414

      can you please link to your source that palestinians “in reality” use a reasoning “a Palestinian state should essentially be Judenrein ”

      It’s only considered racist by the BDS movement

      if that were true, and it’s not, it would only be because others have been brainwashed into making an acception for israel and fear of being accused of anti semitism via media brainwashing.

      Anyone with basic reading skills understands that Rudoren is simply reporting the viewpoint of Israeli Jews – See more at: http://mondoweiss.net/2015/06/demographic-argument-questioning/comment-page-1#comment-771414

      you’ve used that exact same logic before w/rudoren hops. but i beg to differ (again). we’ve heard the term “demographic threat” over and over, but this “democratic death warrant” ups the ante and is new phraseology. these are her words and they are inflammatory. why don’t you try finding this phraseology elsewhere on the internet (even translated from hebrew) you’re fabricating an excuse for her. we’ve heard the term of israel “committing suicide”, but death warrant implies it is being imposed on them. you’re so full of it.

    • Hostage
      Hostage on June 1, 2015, 2:23 pm

      It’s only considered racist by the BDS movement,

      Nope, the Chinese UN representative said as much during the Ad Hoc Committee hearings on the State of Israel’s application for UN membership:

      The attitude of the Israeli Government on the repatriation of Arab refugees was far more disturbing. The theory of national homogeneity could not be supported by the United Nations. One of the basic objectives of the United Nations was to create harmony among peoples of different races and cultures so that they could live together in peace.

      – page 9 link to un.org

      to ignore the fact that the history of forcing people of two different ethnicities who dislike one another together in the same state is extremely bloody, and a disaster almost everywhere it’s been tried.

      No one is ignoring anything, including the fact that you are a frequent and outspoken defender of the genocidal or apartheid techniques that you pretend to abhor. Those crimes are the cause of the bloody disasters, not the demand for equal rights and non-discrimination.

    • eljay
      eljay on June 1, 2015, 2:36 pm

      || hophmi: … to ignore the fact that the history of forcing people of two different ethnicities who dislike one another together in the same state is extremely bloody, and a disaster almost everywhere it’s been tried. ||

      So…what you appear to be saying is that if the non-Jewish citizens of a country dislike the country’s Jewish citizens, it is acceptable for the former to drive out the latter because the two different ethnicities should not be expected to co-exist.

      That sounds pretty damned anti-Semitic to me.

      Or are you suggesting that the right to drive fellow citizens out of a shared country applies only to the Jewish citizens of that country?

    • Sibiriak
      Sibiriak on June 1, 2015, 5:51 pm

      hophmi: “…Rudoren is simply reporting the viewpoint of Israeli Jews, and not necessarily adopting their view.”
      —————–

      I have to agree with hophmi on this point.

      Rudoren writes: “Most Israeli Jews, as well as many outside experts, see either such a one-state solution or the return of all refugees and their descendants as a demographic death warrant for Israel as a Jewish state…”

      That statement would seem to be factually correct– and nobody here has presented any evidence to the contrary.
      ———————-

      Philip Weiss writes: ” anyone who used such language in the United States to refer to black people or Jews or Muslims, or any other minority threatening the white or Christian character of anything would lose their job in an instant.”

      Not if they were simply reporting on the views of some specific people.

      “But Israel is always different; after all, it was founded on the premise of establishing a “strong Jewish majority” so as to be the homeland of the Jewish people. ”

      True. The two cases–the U.S. and Israel–are clearly not analogous in that regard.

      “People who closely follow the conflict know the “demographic threat” argument for preserving Israel is widely considered racist.”

      It’s also widely considered, rightly or wrongly, non-racist and morally valid– there is substantial global support for the maintenance of a Jewish majority in Israel.

      ——————–
      Eve Fairbanks (Guardian article): “‘ What is Jewish?’ I asked. Treating people with dignity,” [B’Tselem’s El-Ad] answered. ‘I think that’s enough.’”

      Any state that treats people with dignity is a “Jewish state”?? That’s silly. By any reasonable understanding of the historical concept, a “Jewish state” requires a Jewish majority, if not a Jewish super-majority.

      The real argument being made, therefore, is that Zionism itself is racist, and that argument has by no means won the day yet. To assume that it already has is simply fallacious.

      • eGuard
        eGuard on June 2, 2015, 7:45 am

        Sibiriak: Rudoren is simply reporting

        No. She does not mention her source, she does not mention who that “outside experts” are, and she does not present any checking action. aka: a biased report.

        For this, it is her and NYT’s statement.

      • CigarGod
        CigarGod on June 2, 2015, 10:21 am

        Agreed. Using “many” to support an argument, is lazy at best. NPR uses this technique all day long.

      • Donald
        Donald on June 2, 2015, 9:23 am

        There is a subtle contradiction in your post, Sibiriak. Yes, taken in isolation Rudoren could say she is simply reporting the views of Israeli Jews, but as you also point out, a great many people just assume the same thing–they don’t reflect on how claiming Israel has the right to be a Jewish state means that Palestinians had no right not to be expelled. Or rather, some have never thought about it and others deliberately avoid the subject. Rudoren is behaving this way, adopting the viewpoint.. A journalist reporting on the Israeli Jewish pov should take care to report the Palestinian view that expelling them from their homes was immoral. Otherwise it is just a subtle endorsement of a viewpoint that is extremely common in the U.S. , especially among politicians and people who get most of their info from mainstream sources like the NYT that have this bias.

      • Keith
        Keith on June 2, 2015, 5:29 pm

        SIBIRIAK- “The real argument being made, therefore, is that Zionism itself is racist, and that argument has by no means won the day yet.”

        If by “won the day yet” you mean that it is not commonly accepted that Zionism is racist, then you are probably correct. However, I believe that Zionism most certainly is a racist doctrine, the writings of the early Eastern European Zionists contain numerous references to the uniqueness of “Jewish blood,” etc., Eastern European Zionism’s roots firmly planted in Blood and Soil nationalism. Furthermore, the whole concept of Jewish peoplehood as a birthright and unalterable birth reality, hence, a pseudo-racial identifier came about with the demise of Classical Judaism as the determining link defining Jewishness, hence, this invented racial determinant. Even now, Israel invests an inordinate amount of resources searching for “Jewish” genes to demonstrate a genetic/racial continuity of world Jewry. This is somewhat analogous to the Nazis use of Phrenology to demonstrate the uniqueness of the Aryan “race.” And is there any doubt that the Zionists have established a racially based hierarchy in Israel?

      • Sibiriak
        Sibiriak on June 4, 2015, 10:58 pm

        Donald: “There is a subtle contradiction in your post, Sibiriak. ”

        I never made the claim that the report wasn’t biased in *any* way, let alone that Rudoren and the NYT did not have a proven record of pro-Israel bias–they do. I referred only to a single specific passage where I disagreed with the notion that Rudoren was expressing her own views, rather than reporting on the views of others.

        ————————-
        Donald: “… A journalist reporting on the Israeli Jewish pov should take care to report the Palestinian view that expelling them from their homes was immoral. Otherwise it is just a subtle endorsement of a viewpoint that is extremely common in the U.S….”

        ———————-

        That’s an extremely important point, and one with which I agree entirely. However, that critical source of bias–omitting or downplaying the ethnic cleansing that has been crucial to the creation of a Jewish super-majority state–is logically and morally distinct from the central assertion of the article: that rhetoric about a Jewish state being demographically threatened is *in itself* unacceptably racist.

        The fact that creation and expansion of a Jewish State in Palestine has required ongoing ethnic cleansing, politicide and, arguably, genocide is critical in distinguishing the moral evaluation of Israel from other cases involving the “self-determination of peoples”, such as that of Tibet (“demographically threatened” by Han Chinese?), collective “ethnic” rights for indigenous tribes, cases of so-called “cultural genocide” and so on.

        It may also be a practical political mistake to *focus* condemnation on the very concept of a “Jewish state” rather than on the specific crimes of ethnic cleansing, apartheid etc. needed to create and maintain such a state *in Palestine*.

      • Sibiriak
        Sibiriak on June 4, 2015, 11:10 pm

        Keith: “SIBIRIAK- ‘The real argument being made, therefore, is that Zionism itself is racist, and that argument has by no means won the day yet.’

        If by “won the day yet” you mean that it is not commonly accepted that Zionism is racist, then you are probably correct.

        —————–

        Yes, that is what I meant. I agree with your insightful points about the racial/genetic foundations of Zionist ideology.

      • Mooser
        Mooser on June 7, 2015, 11:22 am

        “Yes, that is what I meant. I agree with your insightful points about the racial/genetic foundations of Zionist ideology.”

        No, “race” and genetics are two different things and should not be conflated. Ever!

    • Qualtrough
      Qualtrough on June 1, 2015, 11:14 pm

      Really Hopfmi?

      “…questioning their own privilege of living in homogeneous Western states that are not involved in land conflicts…”

      Which homogenous Western states are you referring to here? Surely not the USA, which is far from homogenous. The US is hardly devoid of land conflicts too if you include the ongoing territory disputes involving native Americans and the US government, which I am sure you would include since like most Zionists you love to remind us that the record of the US in dealing with indigenous populations is less than stellar.

      • Mooser
        Mooser on June 2, 2015, 11:00 am

        The US is “homogeneous” ? I thought there was a lot of Jews living there, with all the white people. I also think I’ve seen other minorities here, but maybe Hophmi thinks they just don’t count.

      • RoHa
        RoHa on June 2, 2015, 7:48 pm

        “I also think I’ve seen other minorities here,’

        I gather the same is pretty much true of Canada. Urban Australia looks like a Benetton ad. But Britain? France? Netherlands? All pure white British/French/Dutch. No minorities of any sort. Certainly not a hint of the tinted article to be seen anywhere.

      • Froggy
        Froggy on June 2, 2015, 9:29 pm

        RoHa : “But Britain? France? Netherlands? All pure white British/French/Dutch. No minorities of any sort. ”

        If you believe that, you need to get out more. Or you are telling a porkie….

      • RoHa
        RoHa on June 2, 2015, 10:01 pm

        “Or you are telling a porkie….”

        Who? Me?

      • Froggy
        Froggy on June 3, 2015, 5:39 am

        Indeed, you.

    • Froggy
      Froggy on June 2, 2015, 5:04 pm

      hophmi : “It’s only considered racist by the BDS movement, and only because it’s a nice political way for them to divert people from questioning their own privilege of living in homogeneous Western states….”

      What ‘homogeneous Western states’? Which ones are they? Name them, please.

      France certainly isn’t ‘homogenous’. (I’m a citizen of France, but I am also a Breton from a Breton-speaking family. We Bretons have our own language, history, and culture. Breton is a Brythonic or British Celtic language and is related to Welsh, not French. When we get together, we speak Breton to each other, not French.)

      There are other distinct peoples in France with their own languages and cultures. Loads of us.

      http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:Ethnic_groups_in_France

      Neither is the UK one great homogeneous culture. Tiny Scotland has three distinct languages native to that country: Gaelic, Scots, and English.

      Spain has Jews, Catalans and the Basques, to name a few.

      We all have immigrants, Jewish, Muslim, and from other countries in the EU. Furthermore, the kids are intermarrying.

      So which ‘homogeneous Western states’ are you referring to?

      Furthermore, I know of no one who supports Israel’s atrocities. (I first heard about BDS from an elderly German-born holocaust survivor who now lives in London who urged me to boycott all goods made in Israel.)

  8. a blah chick
    a blah chick on June 1, 2015, 12:39 pm

    What’s under “threat” from the ROR for the Palestinians is not Jewish survival but the privileged status of the ruling Ashkenazi elite. In order to maintain this unfair system (which does not benefit most Jews either) they have to convince the Jewish people that this system is the only thing standing between them and certain death at the hands of the Arabs. Otherwise they would have to justify their special status by asserting their racial superiority as white folk from Europe and that just does not cut it today like it did in 1900.

    • Mooser
      Mooser on June 2, 2015, 1:35 pm

      “What’s under “threat” from the ROR for the Palestinians is not Jewish survival but the privileged status of the ruling Ashkenazi elite. In order to maintain this unfair system (which does not benefit most Jews either) they have to convince the Jewish people that this system is the only thing standing between them and certain death at the hands of the Arabs. Otherwise they would have to justify their special status by asserting their racial superiority as white folk from Europe and that just does not cut it today like it did in 1900.”

      ABC has rung the bell, hit the bulls-eye, placed the ring over the neck of the floating bottle, and is entitled to cigar, coco-nut, or cuddly stuffed animal, as the winner chooses.

      So could it be that apart from the crimes against Palestinians,( and in truth that is the most important thing, but put it aside) Zionism is largely a bid for power by one particular cohort of Jews? Who have lost their power over other Jews in most countries, but see Zionism as way to regain it? Now, there’s a thing worth making Aliyah-oops for. Who would want to miss out on that?

      • WH
        WH on June 2, 2015, 2:33 pm

        There’s more to Israeli racism than just the divide between Ashkenazim and the rest. Look at Beitar Jerusalem – their fans, many of them violent Arab-haters, are Mizrahi Jews. The constant threat of violence to Palestinians on the streets last summer came primarily from Mizrahim, who are mostly lower down in society and therefore feel a greater need to punch down at those who are still below them. And the grotesque irony is that they’re Arabs themselves!

      • Mooser
        Mooser on June 2, 2015, 6:10 pm

        “There’s more to Israeli racism than just the divide between Ashkenazim and the rest.”

        I would be the last person on earth to ever denigrate or deny Israel’s capacity for racism, of any kind. I’m sure it runs in every direction.

  9. ET
    ET on June 1, 2015, 1:21 pm

    What Jewish State?; There is no nation-state on earth named “Jewish State”

    1 The nation-state of the State of Israel, like all other nation-states, are defined by sovereignty of territory & not by respective ethnic composition nor religious affiliation of respective citizenry.
    1.1 Arabs of refugees who originate from UNGA 181 Part II Boundaries., B., Jewish State are Citizens of the State of Israel & NOT Palestinians who are Citizens of the UNGA 181 State of Palestine

    2 Only persons pushing for a single state are State of Israel Netanyahu Government of Bennet & other far right wing political parties.

    2.1 A merger of two, Israel & Palestine, nation-states sovereignty into one nation-state guarantee’s that 100% Right-of-Return to this single nation-state sovereignty
    2.1.1 Its an absurd premise that a UNGA 181 State of Palestine Government could supersede or veto State of Israel’s immigration policy

    2.2. Whereof, UNGA 194 exceeds the parameters of UNSC 242 Compliance Negotiations
    2.2.1 UNGA 181 State of Palestine MANCAT has ZERO to negotiate vis-a-vis UNGA 194
    2.2.2 Likewise of absurd premise that State of Israel could supersede or veto UNGA 181 State of Palestine’s immigration policy

    3 The premise that Arab Citizens of the State of Israel could pose a threat to the sovereignty of territory of the State of Israel is an absurdity.

    3.1 It would be comparable to stating that the Native
    American Citizens of the USA pose a threat to the sovereignty of USA.

    4 Do Israeli_Arabs pose a threat to the racist Non-
    Semitic Ashkenazi in unlawful possession of Government of State of Israel?
    4.1 Most certainly; That is a good for the State of Israel; A good for the Middle East, & a good for humanity.

    • talknic
      talknic on June 1, 2015, 11:14 pm

      @ ET June 1, 2015, 1:21 pm

      “2.2. Whereof, UNGA 194 exceeds the parameters of UNSC 242 Compliance Negotiations”

      A) UNGA res 194 was adopted in 1948 prior to UNSC res 242

      B) UNSC res 242 does not call for negotiations, it calls for respect for and acknowledgement of the sovereignty, territorial integrity and political independence of every State in the area and their right to live in peace within secure and recognized boundaries free from threats or acts of force;” “every State in the area” already had defined borders as of precisely 00:01 15th May 1948 (ME time)

      “4 Do Israeli_Arabs pose a threat to the racist Non-
      Semitic Ashkenazi in unlawful possession of Government of State of Israel?”

      Israel already has a population very likely with a predominantly Arab DNA http://mondoweiss.net/2015/05/palestinians-history-memories#comment-768475

    • can of worms
      can of worms on June 2, 2015, 4:48 am

      ET, #2 is a fabrication. The head spins.

      The Palestinian resistance began with pushing for one democratic state. Through institutional violence (JNF, Histadrut, Jewish Agency, IDF, language, &c.), Zionists have succeeded in pushing Palestinians into separate zones, and thereby creating a 99% racially segregated state in terms of legal rights, resource access, the job market, housing, and education. This is what Rudern/NYT is promoting. However the 1ss is now returning to discourse, BOTH because the 2ss is no longer physically viable, and primarily because Israel was built on the backs of Palestinians whom it had to segregate, oppress and exploit, whereas they have a fair share of ALL of it.

  10. ckg
    ckg on June 1, 2015, 2:23 pm

    Phil, on March 23 in a discussion on Hardball, Chris Matthews said that Israel faced “a demographic time bomb”–his exact words–and that Netanyahu was ignoring it. Matthews needs to be called out too.

    • Citizen
      Citizen on June 1, 2015, 6:30 pm

      I remember when Chris Matthews said that on his show–imagine if he had said, “America faces a demographic time bomb,” referring to the very real changing ethnic demography of this country.

    • ckg
      ckg on June 2, 2015, 12:19 am

      And yes, we all know Matthews walks the line today on Iraq. But where the F was he in 2002 and 2003? My head still spins from his broadcast the evening of Mission Accomplished.

    • Kay24
      Kay24 on June 2, 2015, 6:57 am

      Just for once, I would like to see these media personnel apologize for being wrong about the Iraq war. They should admit to the viewers they got it wrong, and that they were also wrong in running with the Bush/Cheney war mongering without any question.

      • Mooser
        Mooser on June 2, 2015, 11:03 am

        Kay24, as I remember it, the US was still high from the unmitigated and easy sucess of Gulf War 1, (Desert Storm) and far from escaping blame, all anybody was worried about was not being enthusiastic enough about Bush’s War on Iraq.
        Being wrong or right doesn’t enter into it.

  11. Sibiriak
    Sibiriak on June 1, 2015, 6:30 pm

    Philip Weiss: “But the awareness that you shouldn’t use such language is beginning to break on some folks in the mainstream– if not the New York Times. Here’s a Guardian profile today of B’Tselem’s Hagai El-Ad…”
    ————————

    Hagai El-Ad is way, way out of the Israeli mainstream, a fact made perfectly clear by the Guardian article itself.

    • WH
      WH on June 2, 2015, 12:09 pm

      I think Phil’s point was that it was in the Guardian.

  12. talknic
    talknic on June 1, 2015, 7:11 pm

    WE APPEAL – in the very midst of the onslaught launched against us now for months – to the Arab inhabitants of the State of Israel to preserve peace and participate in the upbuilding of the State on the basis of full and equal citizenship and due representation in all its provisional and permanent institutions.

  13. JennieS
    JennieS on June 1, 2015, 10:24 pm

    The Palestinians are a demographic reality that neither the 19th centuary Zionists nor the 20th centuary United Nations took into account when seeking to establish a permanent Jewish state. Israel appears to regard it’s self as like the US, Canada, Australia and New Zealand which are permanent colonial states. Unfortunately Israel resembles French Indochina or Algeria, Dutch Indonesia or British India and numerous African states which have returned to the control of their indigenous peoples.

    • Citizen
      Citizen on June 2, 2015, 8:40 am

      Zionists like to justify their state action by pointing to the old western colonial states, such as those you mention; I notice whenever they do, they ignore international law changed in ’45-’48 as a result of the Nuremberg Trials & Tokyo Trials & their Geneva progeny. If memory serves, one of the German defendant’s defenses was that the charges reflected ex post facto law. That’s didn’t work for them.

  14. RoHa
    RoHa on June 1, 2015, 11:00 pm

    “Jodi Rudoren has responded to Khalek that she wasn’t saying that the right of return is a death warrant for Jews, but for the Jewish state.”

    But “death warrant” is a loaded term. There is no real death involved, but the connotations of the term are supposed to arouse the same fear and repugnance as if it were an actual death warrant.

    • ckg
      ckg on June 1, 2015, 11:48 pm

      Take your choice: threat, death warrant, time bomb, whatever. Their over-the-top rhetoric is offensive. After all, we are talking about the dispossesed and their children.

    • Sibiriak
      Sibiriak on June 1, 2015, 11:55 pm

      RoHa: “But ‘death warrant’ is a loaded term. There is no real death involved…”
      ——————–

      Good point. We need to cleanse writing of all figurative language. (Whoops, I shouldn’t say “cleanse”, should I?)

    • Kay24
      Kay24 on June 2, 2015, 6:59 am

      She seems to be comfortable that the Palestinians live under that death warrant, and have been doing so for decades. For totally biased Rudoren, as long as her people have the upper hand, everything should be okay.

    • Keith
      Keith on June 2, 2015, 5:50 pm

      ROHA- “But “death warrant” is a loaded term.”

      Damn right it is, and intentionally so. This is an indication of propaganda. To call the granting of equal rights to Palestinians as a “death warrant” for the Jewish state indicates extreme bias. One could just as well refer to the Emancipation Proclamation as a “death warrant” for the US as conceived by our (slave owning) Founding Fathers. Do we?

  15. ckg
    ckg on June 1, 2015, 11:43 pm

    I recall the first time I read the phrase “demographic time bomb” in reference to I/P was in an article nearly 25 years ago in a piece in mainline Christian Century by U.S. Rep Father Robert Drinan. I was so incensed about the implied racism that I wrote a letter to the magazine editors which they kindly published.

  16. Kathleen
    Kathleen on June 2, 2015, 12:01 am

    “It’s about time the New York Times reflected this understanding”

    Don’t hold your breath.

    Phil the latest State Dept report on Lebanon has travel warnings increasing

  17. can of worms
    can of worms on June 2, 2015, 1:13 am

    “Most Israeli Jews, as well as many outside experts, see either such a one-state solution or the return of all refugees and their descendants as a demographic death warrant for Israel as a Jewish state, which is how it was founded in 1948. ”

    (1) “Most Israeli Jews” = of COURSE Israeli Jews do, because they’ve been freakin raised in segregated Jewish-only neighborhoods, Jewish only cities, Jewish only laws and Jewish only schools for god’s sake. How else would you want them to think?

    (2) “as well as many outside experts” = name them. (You can’t, because they are all Zionists with interests in keeping racial privileges.)

    (3) “Death warrant”. = Not a death, but a birth of a democratic state with equal civil rights for all. The return of refugees is a self-evident human right. I fail to see what the discussion is about unless Rudoren and the New York Times are making a claim against basic civil and human rights.

    (4) “which is how it was founded in 1948”. = in the best case, Israel was envisioned as a homeland, which term does not exclude all the land as being a homeland of all the people. equally. But you are right in the sense that in practice Zionists founded Israel in 1948 on a basis where Palestinians are a demographic threat.
    Hence Zionism kills.

  18. WH
    WH on June 2, 2015, 7:01 am

    I think what’s scandalous about Rudoren’s comment is actually something else. As some have pointed out above, what she writes is simply a reported opinion; she herself doesn’t call Palestinians a demographic death warrant. But what’s shocking is that she claims MOST ISRAELI JEWS do. Of course, this may well be true, which is then shocking in itself and would surely require some comment.

    • can of worms
      can of worms on June 2, 2015, 3:09 pm

      Yes well that’s just the thing. For a Jewish-Israeli people raised under total segregation and apartheid, one can understand it’s as hard for a non-racist, pluralistic idea to get in their head as it is for a camel to get through a needle’s eye or something like that. Fine! But then what’s the NYT’s excuse, for naturalizing the phrase “demographic threat / death warrant” as if it deserves no attention in itself? That’s the thing.

    • Bornajoo
      Bornajoo on June 2, 2015, 4:48 pm

      “There’s more to Israeli racism than just the divide between Ashkenazim and the rest. Look at Beitar Jerusalem – their fans, many of them violent Arab-haters, are Mizrahi Jews. The constant threat of violence to Palestinians on the streets last summer came primarily from Mizrahim, who are mostly lower down in society and therefore feel a greater need to punch down at those who are still below them. And the grotesque irony is that they’re Arabs themselves! ”

      Absolutely right! My family in israel are Mizrahi and most of them are frighteningly racist

      And they are now the main support Base of Likud which is ostensibly a party of mainly Ashkenazi members

      This weird and perverted alliance began in the late 70s when Begin wooed the Mizrahi to vote for him on promises of equality and higher living standards (nothing to do with justice for the Palestinians of course)

      I suppose it’s a bit like smoking. Once you start smoking a certain brand you tend to stick with them for the rest of your life. The relationship between the Mizrahi and Likud is a bit like this. Many Mizrahi are from a generally lower rung and less educated segment of Israeli society they are easily led by shallow populist racist politics of fear which Likud does so well.

  19. just
    just on June 2, 2015, 11:45 am

    That great profile by Eve Fairbanks of B’Tselem’s Hagai El-Ad looked so familiar to me; it was from March 12, 2015.

    I am really glad to see him quoted again here. Thanks for the article, Phil. And thanks to Dan Cohen for the beautiful photo.

    As for Rudoren, she disgraces the NYT, herself, and the Palestinian people with increasingly remarkable rapidity.

    (I’m trying to be polite about Rudoren…)

  20. hank
    hank on June 2, 2015, 6:18 pm

    I take strong exception to the use of the term, “Judenrein”, in these pages to describe any area without a Jewish population. The term was employed by the Nazis specifically to denote an area whose Jewish population had been expunged, initially by deportation, later by extermination. Its use in other contexts is as misleading as describing any situation you dislike as a “Holocaust.”

    • Kris
      Kris on June 2, 2015, 8:40 pm

      Maybe you are replying to this comment by amigo:

      “As to Palestinians wanting a Judenrein state, that is a lie.They want a state free of Israeli citizens and that includes non Jews.You see they are forbidden by the 4th GC to be squatting in Palestine.”

      If you would click on the “Reply” button immediately following the comment to which you are replying, your reply would be situated in the appropriate place.

      Anyway, there is nothing holy about words like “Judenrein” or “Holocaust.” These words are quite evocative, however, which is a good thing, reminding us, as they do, that though the Holocaust ended long ago, the suffering of the Holocaust victims continues to be exploited as a cynical justification for the slow-motion holocaust that Israel, in the name of all Jews everywhere, is carrying out against the Palestinians.

Leave a Reply