Palestine Advocacy Project (PalAD) has launched a dynamic new ad campaign “Israel’s Leaders: In Their Own Words,” directly quoting prominent Israeli officials’ extremist and bigoted rhetoric.
The In Their Own Words series was created to spark conversation on U.S. college campuses seldom featured in the mainstream media. Thus far nine college campuses, including University of California-Berkeley, have agree to publish ads in their campus newspapers.
PalAd intern Maggie Liu said, “As a college student living on a politically-active campus, I know firsthand how little young people know about the reality of the situation. I hope these ads will bring some much-needed dialogue to campuses across the country.”
Palestine Advocacy Project notes that during this election cycle American politicians have condemned Donald Trump’s racist, inflammatory rhetoric but they let Israeli politicians off the hook time and again because both the Democratic and Republican establishments pander to the Israel lobby:
Because, as Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu put it, “I know what America is. America is a thing you can move very easily, move it in the right direction.”
One of the ads features Israel’s explicitly racist Minister of Justice, Ayelet Shaked. Liu points out, “If you do your own research, you’ll quickly find many more hateful quotes.” She’s absolutely right.
One of the ads features Israel’s deputy defense minister, Rabbi Eli Ben Dahan, who heads the army’s “Civil Administration” (occupation) of the West Bank supervising the theft of Palestinian land as well as granting and revoking entry and travel permits for Palestinians. He says Palestinians are beasts:
![Israeli deputy defense minister Rabbi Eli Ben Dahan "[Palestinians] "are beasts, they are not human.” (Graphic: Palestine Advocacy Project)](https://mondoweiss.net/wp-content/uploads/2016/10/BenDahanforweb6-580x320.jpg)
Remember former Israeli Defense Minister Moshe Ya’alon’s inflammatory reference to amputating organs“?:
PalAd intends to continue exposing the hypocrisy surrounding the U.S.’s relationship with Israel. Their 2014 “One Word” campaign showcased the daily violence Palestinians are subjected to. PalAd’s recent poetry campaign brought Palestinian Poet Laureate Mahmoud Darwish’s work into public spaces. And their new campaign, focusing on the violent rhetoric of upper echelons of Israeli political leadership — backed by US politicians — synchronizes with our election cycle. There’s no better time to have a national dialogue about our relationship with Israel.
Check out more of these violent statements here. The campaign is also accepting donations here.
Too bad the UK panel discussing (for the last 12 months ) alleged antisemitism in the Labour party has not seen fit to carry out an investigation of the Islamophobia and Arab hatred , not to mention incitement to violence carried out by nietanyahu and his thugs that run the zio enterprise.No siree , it would be antisemitic to tell the truth about zios.Don.t blame me , I am just quoting a Jewish acquaintance
UK government agrees that Jews should be the ones to decide what is antisemitic and not “Goysplainers”.Haaretz.
“The report states what should be obvious but sadly is not – that the starting point for any discussion on anti-Semitism should be what the Jewish community and Jews themselves feel is anti-Semitic. This is important because unlike other forms of racism and bias against ethnic minorities, gay people and women, the subjective opinion of the targeted group has not been taken into consideration.
Instead, with Jews there is all too often a tendency toward “goysplaining,” where non-Jews condescendingly explain to Jews why they are wrong at being offended. No other minority is treated in such a fashion, and this report, which categorically states that Jews should also be allowed to flag what constitutes anti-Jewish speech in their eyes, is a landmark document.
read more: http://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?q=cache:http://www.haaretz.com/world-news/europe/.premium-1.747716
Btw , is the term Goy an insult to all non Jews. Instead of me goyspplaining , why not let one of our Jewish contributors give us the ruling on that.
amigo, in my opinion Corbyn does not fight back strongly enough on these issues, Islamophobia dwarfs Antisemitism in the UK, yet he accepts the charges, many unfounded as factually true. Here is part of what he said at that select committee hearing..
“I am also concerned by some other aspects of the Committee’s report. The Committee heard evidence from too narrow a pool of opinion, and its then-chair rejected both Chakrabarti’s and the Jewish Labour Movement’s requests to appear and give evidence before it. Not a single woman was called to give oral evidence in public, and the report violates natural justice by criticising individuals without giving them a right to be heard”.
“The report’s political framing and disproportionate emphasis on Labour risks undermining the positive and welcome recommendations made in it.
“Although the Committee heard evidence that 75 per cent of antisemitic incidents come from far right sources, and the report states there is no reliable evidence to suggest antisemitism is greater in Labour than other parties, much of the report focuses on the Labour party.
“As the report rightly acknowledges, politicising antisemitism – or using it as a weapon in controversies between and within political parties – does the struggle against it a disservice. http://labourlist.org/2016/10/anti-semitism-report-violates-natural-justice-corbyns-response-to-mps-report/
Thanks Annie for reporting these ads, which unfortunately are in line with what other Israeli leaders have said both political, and religious,down the decades.
@HarryLaw
“amigo, in my opinion Corbyn does not fight back strongly enough on these issues, Islamophobia dwarfs Antisemitism in the UK, yet he accepts the charges, many unfounded as factually true”
100% agree on this one.He is in many ways a wimp. What was needed when this “institutionalised Anti – Semitism in the Labour Party” farce began and continues to be needed to address the absurd findings of this mickey mouse committee is someone with a backbone ( eg Ken Livingstone and yes George Galloway ) to describe it plainly for what it is = a clumsy attempt by the Israel/Zionist lobby in the UK to conflate anti – Zionism with anti -Semitism and to silence the growing levels of criticism of Zionism and Israel as well as the growing threat of BDS.
It will of course backfire because the UK is not the US. The thought that a member of a tiny religious cult ( in this case Judaism ) should be allowed to accuse someone of a ” hate crime” based simply on a subjective interpretation of what a person said or wrote is quite frankly bizarre – in fact I would go further and say that it is a clear example of Ziobizarrics (whoops now I am in real trouble ).
If supporting International law means recognizing the State of Israel within the borders proclaimed in 1947/8 by the representatives of the Israeli Government, and as agreed to by the United Nations General Assembly, then isn’t anyone who accepts the Israeli State within those borders ipso facto a Zionist? At least as far as the Balfour declaration is concerned i.e. the establishment of a Jewish home in Palestine, it being clearly understood that nothing shall be done which may prejudice the civil and religious rights of existing non-Jewish communities in Palestine. But then some ‘Zionists’ say the state of Israel should encompass the whole of Palestine or the ‘Land of Israel’. It is this problematical definition of ‘Zionism’ which needs to be addressed. In this respect it could be argued that Professor N Finkelstein is a Zionist, in the sense he wants International law to be enforced, which entails the recognition of the state of Israel [within its borders and not a ‘Jewish state’] as a legitimate state, whether it practices discrimination against non Jews [which it does] is another matter to be challenged within that state. So in my opinion both those who advocate for two states, or one state, could be called Zionists of one sort or another, even if the one state could result in a majority non Jewish majority some time in the future, it would still be a ‘home’ for the Jewish people as envisaged by Balfour.http://www.palestinechronicle.com/uk-parliament-declares-the-term-zionistanti-semitic/
Recognizing Israel at all is a clear violation of International Anti-Genocide Law as embodied in the customary international anti-genocide law in the case law of the Nuremberg Tribunal and in the International Convention for the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide.
After Auschwitz it was vile and criminal to create a state in post-Auschwitz genocide.
For international law to have any meaning whatsoever, the white racist genocidal Euro settler colonist invaders like my family must be removed and tried for their crimes since the beginning of the Zionist movement in the 1880s until the ongoing genocide that takes place before our eyes today.