Genocide! Happening Right Now!

By now everyone is probably aware of the terrible genocide currently being committed against that proud ancient brown indigenous people in the Middle East.  You know, the people who have been colonized and occupied for years?

Picture from the genocide in question

------------------------------------------------------------------

Oh wait, you thought I was talking about the Palestinians?   You must be incredibly stupid!

First of all, the "Palestinian" territories have the highest rate of natural population increase in the world.  In the world!  That is the opposite of a genocide.  For something to be a genocide, the population of the supposed target group has to at least stop going up at the highest rate in the world.  Plus there is all that stuff about thousands of rockets being fired from schools and hospitals and so on.  There is also that little matter that the Palestinians are not ancient at all.

--------------------------------------------------------------------

No, I am talking about the genocide of the Yezidis.  See, even though you don't know about it, because the media seems to be silent, right now the Yezidi people, who practice a unique religion that predates Islam and speak Kurdish, are being killed and expelled from the last of their homeland in Iraq.   A larger fraction of Yezidis have died and been displaced than Palestinians lately, but for some reason hardly anyone knows about the Yezidis.  Hmm, very "interesting".

Stranded on a barren mountaintop, thousands of minority Iraqis are faced with a bleak choice: descend and risk slaughter at the hands of the encircled Sunni extremists or sit tight and risk dying of thirst.

Humanitarian agencies said Tuesday that between 10,000 and 40,000 civilians remain trapped on Mount Sinjar since being driven out of surrounding villages and the town of Sinjar two days earlier. But the mountain that had looked like a refuge is becoming a graveyard for their children. 

Unable to dig deep into the rocky mountainside, displaced families said they have buried young and elderly victims of the harsh conditions in shallow graves, their bodies covered with stones.

--------------------------------------------------------------------

The Yezidis are not the only current victims of genocide that you've never heard of.

The Assyrian people are even more ancient, the descendents of the Sumerian civilization.  Historically they were spread across Iraq and formed around 8% of the Iraqi population in the late 20th century.  As Christians they have been an especially vulnerable target of Islamic militants.  Between 2003 and 2009 one million Assyrians - two-thirds of the total population - were driven from Iraq.  The rump that has remained has now been targeted by ISIS, who have issued convert or die orders to the remaining Assyrian community in Mosul.

But wait, there's more!  Have you heard of the Mandaeans?  I didn't think so.  They are another ancient minority in Iraq.  The Mandeans practice a religion that fuses Christianity with Gnostic philosophy.  In the past 20 years, due to persecutions, murders, and expulsions, their population in Iraq has gone from 60,000 to around 5,000 today.  A reduction of 92%?  Now that is a genocide. 

--------------------------------------------------------------------

So why is it that all of these groups, who are each more ancient than the Palestinians, and who are actually losing numbers and actually in danger of extinction in their homelands whereas the Palestinians are not, are getting only the tiniest fraction of the amount of concern that the Palestinians are??

Why is it that there are thousands of editorials over the Palestinians but zero for the Yezidis, who are actually going extinct?? 

Why are there hundreds of articles at HuffPo and Daily Kos about the Palestinians but none for the Assyrians, who are going to actually disappear from their five thousand year homeland?? 

Why have their been dozens of protests worldwide about the Palestinians whose population goes up every single day but none for the Mandaeans who have declined by 92%??

One of those "human rights" activists who supports Palestinians and definitely doesn't have any other motivation

------------------------------------------------------------

Well, we all know the answer.

It is because Palestinians are involved in a conflict with Jews, and the rest are not.  When Jews can be somehow blamed, the world perks up and takes note.  The rest of these groups are S.O.L., because even though they are actually going extinct in the Middle East due to the genocidal activities of their neighbors, nobody cares for or has even heard about them, because their situation cannot be blamed on Israel.

This proves that people who are supposedly concerned with "Palestinians" are really just haters of Jews.  If they were really concerned about human rights and oppressed peoples, they would devote at least a fraction of their concern to the Yezidis, Assyrians, and Mandaeans.

--------------------------------------------------------------

This is why I must conclude that all Western pro-Palestinian activists are solely motivated by pure antisemitism, and/or pure hatred of America and the West.  Full stop.  They simply don't care one bit about human rights or actual people, or else they would have at least heard of these other groups.  They only care about people if they can be a means to bash America, Israel, or the West.

So let me say it again:

So-called pro-Palestinian activists only care about people if they can be a means to bash America, Israel, or the West. 

The Best Video Clip Ever

If you are a person who, like me, is appalled by anti-Israel idiocy, both of the left and the right, then this video clip will make your day, possibly your year:

For those who are not familiar with it, Real Time With Bill Maher is one of the touchstones of American liberal culture.

In this episode Maher, along with Liberal Congresswoman Jane Harmon and conservative pundit Jamie Weinstein, spend five minutes bashing Hamas and praising Israel!  They make it perfectly clear who is to blame for the violence.

Not only that, they manage to hit so many of the salient points that are tragically taboo in American and Western discourse about the Israeli-Arab conflict, including the one million Jews ethnically cleansed from Arab countries, Hamas' genocidal charter, and the cultural reasons that Arab society is backward and cannot accept peace.

It is absolutely amazing to see this discussion on American television.  Moreso, this clip, because it has both liberal and conservative figures on it - agreeing - should be forwarded to everyone's liberal and conservative friends.  It simply cannot be dismissed as "oh just those (liberal/conservative) partisans".

And I have saved the best for last...  Throughout this clip Maher's audience constantly cheers the points made!  That's right, those extreme LA liberals are cheering over and over the defense of Israel and the bashing of Hamas AND the whole anti-Israel position.

I'm just beside myself.  It is the perfect anecdote to the hateful, ignorant, idiocy being belched all over the internet by deluded Israel haters.  I think I'll watch it again.

Anti-Semitism Is Rampant in the Middle East and North Africa

This is a reprint with permission of the author from Daily Kos: http://www.dailykos.com/story/2014/05/14/1299372/-Anti-Semitism-Is-Rampant-in-the-Middle-East-and-North-Africa. I was going to write something about this but got "beat to the punch"... So... Here it is:

The New York Times certainly got my attention with this headline: “26 Percent of World’s Adults Are Anti-Semitic, Survey Finds.”

http://www.nytimes.com/...
http://global100.adl.org

The survey in question was a global survey conducted by the Anti-Defamation League, and designed to probe the level and intensity of anti-semitism. The survey also found that half the respondents had never heard of the Holocaust. Now, that finding doesn’t necessarily mean the people are anti-semitic. It could to some extent just indicate ignorance. I’d consider it more anti-semitic if someone had indeed heard of the Holocaust, but denied that it actually happened or tried to argue that it was overblown.

Interestingly, the highest levels of anti-semitism are in the Middle East and North Africa. But before jumping to the list of the most anti-semitic countries, let’s take a look at the least anti-semitic countries, as measured by the percentages of adults holding anti-semitic views:

Thailand                    13%
Tanzania                    12%
Denmark                      9%
United States               9%
United Kingdom         8%
Vietnam                      6%
Netherlands                5%
Sweden                      4%
Philippines                 3%
Laos                        0.2%

http://www.timesofisrael.com/...

A couple of interesting observations. Some of these countries have almost no Jewish population, and few Jewish visitors, so one might suggest that lack of direct exposure correlates with the absence of anti-semitism. That isn’t really the case, however, as we will see when we reach the list of the worst offenders. Many of those virulently anti-semitic countries have no Jewish population or visitors, either. The other observation is that even in the good countries, there are significant percentages of respondents who believe that Jews put loyalty to Israel ahead of loyalty to their own country:

Sweden        27%
UK               27%
US                31%
Denmark      39%

The dual-loyalty claim is anti-semitic, but is also a form of prejudice directed against other minorities. For example, dual loyalty claims were common smears during John F. Kennedy’s presidential campaign.

Now let’s look at the worst offenders. Greece is apparently the most anti-semitic country in Europe, at 69%, but the Greeks are amateurs when compared to the Arab/Moslem world:

Morocco/Qatar/UAE     tied for 10th most anti-semitic, at 80%
Jordan      81%
Bahrain    81%
Kuwait     82%
Tunisia     86%
Libya       87%
Algeria    87%
Yemen     88%
Iraq          92%

And the most anti-semitic (cue drum roll, please)....

West Bank/Gaza 93%

Now I know that West Bank/Gaza isn’t actually a country, but if a Palestinian state is ever formed, that’s what it consist of.

So what is the takeaway from this survey? Well, as it applies to the prospects for peace between Israel, on the one hand, and the Palestinians and other Arab countries, on the other hand, it is both relevant and bleak. It is often argued that all Israel has to do is end the occupation of the West Bank and Gaza, and there will be peace. These extreme levels of anti-semitism, however, raise the distinct possibility that the Arab/Moslem world will never accept Israel, because it is the Jewish national homeland. Indeed, one must ask whether this conflict can ever end, as long as one side harbors such extreme prejudice and hatred towards the majority population of the other side. 

Hamas: Recognizing Israel is a Red Line

From JNEREBEL over at Daily Kos 

RE-PRINTED WITH AUTHORS PERMISSION

Note: Over at Daily Kos, the admins. have decided to attempt to create a "Fact Free Zone" around the discussion of the Israeli - Palestinian conflict. Only a few of the original Progressive / Liberal Zionists are left in the face of increasing administratively sanctioned anti-Semitic, anti-Zionist attacks.  One of these few JNEREBEL has been great in bringing full honesty to the endless barrage of hate that passes for writing over there.

US News reports today in an interview with Abu Marzouk, deputy chairman of Hamas' political bureau that Hamas will not abide by any of the Quartets requirements.

Hamas will not recognize Israel

Hamas will not renounce violence

Hamas will not abide by previous international agreements
Marzouk says recognizing Israel is a red line that Hamas will not cross. He further declares that Hamas military forces will remain separate and not be absorbed into the future Palestinian army. Having a standing militia not under government control would obviously imperil any future non-Hamas ruled regime with a waiting militia ready to attack it as well as Israel at any time.

Al-Monitor: The weapons wielded by the al-Qassam Brigades constitute one of the hardest issues dealt with in the reconciliation effort. What are Hamas’ proposals in this regard, and what are the red lines that you think must not be crossed? Will you allow the brigades to be assimilated into the Palestinian security forces? 

Abu Marzouk: This issue was not discussed at all in reconciliation negotiations with Fatah; it was never put on the table. The al-Qassam Brigades’ weaponry is of national importance to confront the occupation. Hamas’ position in this regard is clear, and it will not allow any tampering with the brigades’ armament, under any circumstances, because it is a strategic asset for all Palestinians. In contrast, the Quartet negotiations require that violence be renounced, which, in effect, means that the al-Qassam weapons must be decommissioned. But this is unacceptable, and Hamas will reject it outright.

Al-Monitor: It was not clear whether Hamas would endorse the agreements signed between the PLO and Israel, if it became part of the former. Can you clarify the movement’s position in this regard?

Abu Marzouk: Hamas will not recognize Israel. This is a red line that cannot be crossed. The future government is not interested in providing Israel with recognition, and the conditions set by the Quartet committee do not concern us one bit. We would have spared ourselves seven years of misery under the siege and two wars in 2008 and 2012 had we wanted to recognize Israel. Hamas underwent great political pressure and suffering during the past years, and yet it did not recognize Israel.

Juan Cole… Definitely Uninformed and Often Wrong

Juan Cole of “Ahmadinejhad really didn’t say he wanted to wipe Israel off the map” fame is at it once again. When it comes to Israel, Cole spends so much time twisting himself and distorting positions that it seems that the man would have to screw his pants on (h/t to Hunter S. Thompson) to get dressed in the morning. On his page “Informed Comment” (a misnomer if there ever was one) Cole writes: John Kerry admits Israeli Apartheid; and 5 Ways he is Understating It. In this article Cole gives us an fact free screed as to how Israel is an “Apartheid State” beginning with his inaccurate headline.

Where to start? Well let’s look at the Headline “Kerry admits Israeli Apartheid”. First of all that is NOT what Secretary Kerry did. What Kerry did do was say that were there to be a “One State Solution” there COULD be Apartheid (by the way, a term / position that runs directly contrary to terminology used by President Obama).
Here is Kerry’s statement:

“A two-state solution will be clearly underscored as the only real alternative,”…. Because a unitary state winds up either being an apartheid state with second-class citizens—or it ends up being a state that destroys the capacity of Israel to be a Jewish state. Once you put that frame in your mind, that reality, which is the bottom line, you understand how imperative it is to get to the two-state solution, which both leaders, even yesterday, said they remain deeply committed to.”

Unless one has the reading comprehension of a small child, it is clear that Secretary Kerry is saying that should there be One State solution (which there is not); Israel would run the risk of becoming an Apartheid type state. What he did not say was “Israel is an Apartheid State”. So, from the very headline this article fails.

From here it simply gets more ridiculous. The entire premise of the article states that there is already a One State solution in place and that Palestinians in the West Bank and Gaza are in fact Israeli Citizens who are treated as “second class citizens”. NOW, if Israel did annex the West Bank and Gaza and did not offer the right of franchise amongst other civil rights to all of its citizens one could make that argument but the Israelis have not done this. AND even if they wanted to ignore all of the security concerns and everything else exactly to whom would they be handing this land over too (but never mind that I guess)? So with that the entire analogy of conflating Israel to South Africa fails miserably.

Cole’s first argument is that Israel is creating “Bantustans” in the West Bank and Gaza (just like South Africa):

“South Africa created Bantustans as a way of denaturalizing Blacks, ensuring that they could not vote for the national government and were assigned citizenship only in their weak Bantustan.”

So, while on the surface there is a similarity to say the Bennett plan for this kind of solution, the Bennett plan is a plan created by a coalition member and not an official negotiating position of the Israelis at this point in time. But even so, this is only a surface similarity to the Bantustans created by the South Africans.  Why is that?

First of all Gaza is and always has been a separate district from the founding of Israel forward. It has been occupied by the Egyptians and by the Israelis and both nations no longer occupy it. It was not part of the original State of Israel but it has always been a hostile territory to Israel.  Moreover, Gaza is not under military rule of Israel. It is under military blockade (and rightfully so considering the regular attacks that are continually launched from Gaza) but, the streets there are not patrolled by Israeli troops and the Haniyeh Government does not answer to the Israelis. It was not a piece of land that was carved out of Israel by the Israelis and handed to the Gazans in the same way the Whites in South Africa carved out states for Blacks.

Second of all, The West Bank is the same situation. It is not and was not originally part of Israel or at least the Partition Plan that the U.N. used to establish Palestinian and Jewish homelands. The Israelis have installed a series of checkpoints in the West Bank and Israeli soldiers do patrol the area but given the security climate, that is understandable. I know in Cole’s world that Jews and Israelis are not allowed to defend themselves but here in reality we are and we do. Still, as mentioned above, the “Bantustans” (which don’t in reality – there’s that word again, exist) are not land carved out of a national territory that had already existed. The checkpoints exist due to security concerns. Last I or any checked a nation is certainly not obligated to allow people to attack it.

Cole’s second argument like his first once again falls flat when he argues:

South Africa instituted a “pass” system to control the movement of Blacks.

“Israel instituted a “permit” system to control the movement of Palestinians.”

Now wait… I didn’t realize that Palestinians who were citizens of Israel needed permits to move around inside of Israel. They don’t? Well golly…. Of course the Palestinians living in the Occupied Territories are not citizens of Israel, they don’t recognize Israel’s right to exist, and there have been a number of terror strikes against Israel originating from the Territories, is it any wonder why the Israelis would want security in these areas. Now in order to be analogous to South Africa, Israel would have to have those same checkpoints in place throughout its territory and only Israeli – Arabs would have to be subject to that as Blacks were in South Africa. However, that is simply not the case. So yet again Cole’s fact free article remains true to form.

Cole’s next argument again relies on fiction to try to make a comparison:

“In Apartheid South Africa, 80% of the land was set aside for white settlers.

Israel itself was ethnically cleansed of 750,000 Palestinians in 1948, and was designated “Jewish,” such that the expelled Palestinians (now millions strong) were denied the right to return to their homes.”

Now… for a second let’s remember that history actually exists and it is not some made up story as Cole wishes it was.

First of all, according to the U.N. Partition plan Israel was to be 17.5% of the Original Partition. Of that land:

“Overall, the Jewish State was to be comprised of roughly 5,500 square miles and the population was to be 538,000 Jews and 397,000 Arabs. The Arab State was to be 4,500 square miles with a population of 804,000 Arabs and 10,000 Jews. Though the Jews were allotted more total land, the majority of that land was in the desert.”

Not even of the 17.5% of the original Mandate was there any land set aside for “Jews only”. But the weak comparison to South Africa is not the most egregious part of this statement.  The most egregious part of this is the claim that 750,000 (and now millions of) Palestinians were “ethnically cleansed”. First of all the “millions” claim is based on a unique count that the U.N. assigns only to Palestinian refugees. No other refugees in the world can share this status. Not the almost 900,000 Jewish refugees from the Arab countries that came to Israel or any other refugees that exist in the world. Just the Palestinians get to do this.

Second of all, even according to Benny Morris’ book 1948 (considered one of the foremost works on this issue); many refugees were not actually “cleansed”. There were instances of that and in cases where the villagers had peace treaties with Haganah forces but were still driven out; I do believe that those people should have a right to compensation for their losses. But in most cases, the civilian populations either left in flight of the war or left as a result of hostile action against the IDF. I understand why someone would leave a war zone but if one leaves a war that one’s side started, and one is either an active or sympathetic participant on the losing side then one pretty much loses their “right” to return. The Israelis of the Yishuv had no obligation to allow hostile forces who were sniping convoys from villages or actively working against them to return to those villages. Again, suicide is not something that Israel is obligated to do.

And again we see Cole really stretching the “Apartheid” comparison when he says:

“In Apartheid South Africa, Blacks from the Bantustans could not attend universities designated for whites”

But in Israel, Israeli citizens whether they are Arab or Jewish can attend Israeli Universities. Again, to attend Israeli Universities, one must be an Israeli citizen in most cases (with exceptions for foreign exchange students). Palestinians in the West Bank are not Israeli citizens, so really Israel has no obligation to allow them to attend Israeli Universities. No nation’s educational system has an obligation to allow people that are not citizens attend their colleges. Israeli Universities are also not “designated for Whites” (or Jews as Cole means), all Israelis are allowed to attend.
Now none of this is meant to “whitewash” problems that Arab Students face when attending school in Israel. There certainly are problems with the system. But to compare it Apartheid South Africa is to diminish just how horrible real Apartheid was.
Finally Cole, ends up his embarrassingly fact free column with this:

“South African Apartheid forbade marriages between people of different ethnicities.

Israelis of Jewish and Palestinian heritage cannot intermarry in Israel. Two Israeli citizens of different ethnic heritage can marry abroad and return to Israel. But Israeli-Palestinians who marry Palestinians from the Occupied West Bank are not allowed to bring their spouse to Israel. The same problem is not faced by Israeli Jews who marry squatters on the Palestinian West Bank.”

Unlike South Africa where this was a system designed to keep Black and White South Africans from marrying this is not the case in Israel. The system (one, I think is awful) was designed so that only Orthodox Jews can have State licensed / performed marriages. It is a stupid law for the year 2014 but it is not designed to discriminate against Palestinians. For instance, I cannot get married in Israel because my wife is not Jewish. I would have had to go to Cyprus or Europe or the U.S. for a civil marriage. The system sucks (pardon my language) but it is not a “racist” system, it is just very much behind the times.

As for Palestinians marrying someone from the Territories, the Israeli position while sad is understandable given the fact that again Israel is under no obligation to grant citizenship or residency to anyone that is not a citizen. Can Israelis marry someone from the territories and bring them to Israel? Nope. Is that objectively fair? No. Is it Apartheid? Not by a long shot.

In the end, Cole’s farce of an article should be satire. Sadly it is not. To compare Israel to South Africa is a joke. In South Africa Whites were 12% of that nation’s population. In Israel Jews are 77% of the population. Blacks as a population were completely disenfranchised. Arab-Israelis are not. Blacks were segregated in every sector of society. Israeli-Arabs are not. Israel is the ancestral homeland of the Jewish people. I am pretty sure that South Africa is NOT the ancestral homeland of the Dutch or British White people.

One can agree with the point being made by John Kerry or not. I happen to think Kerry chose an unfortunate word “Apartheid” to make his point. I think his concern is valid but even with a One State solution; one would still be fairly far away from accurately using the term Apartheid and having that term mean anything.

Goodbye J Street

Dear J Street , 

It’s time I said “Goodbye”.  

Why? Because I am not sure that you represent my values anymore. 

Over the years, I have been to various events, went to see such speakers as Jeremy Ben-Ami, and Bradley Burston (both very good discussions), blogged my support at Daily Kos and at my own website The Progressive Zionist, and supported J Street with donations. I no longer feel that I can do that and furthermore don’t really understand how anyone who would consider themselves both “Pro-Israel”, and  ”Pro-Peace” could stay in the organization given what is about to happen.

  

While I agree with most of J-Street’s policy statements (support for reasonable Two State solution, Anti-BDS, Pro-Civil Rights) regarding Israel, giving activists who support BDS, and spread messages of hatred toward Israel an active platform is a step too far. When did this happen? Well here it is. 

J Street is hosting a discussion with author David Harris Gershon regarding a book that he wrote wherein he talks about his path to dealing with having his wife being harmed in a Terror attack and how he has tried to reconcile that to his life. Harris-Gershon took the unique step of actually meeting with the family of the terrorist in order to understand just what made that person plant a bomb in a school cafeteria and then to forge some kind of closure to the incident. 

All that would be fine and good except for the fact that Harris-Gershon trades heavily in anti-Zionist and anti-Semitic memes.  Now these are pretty serious allegations and I don’t make these lightly nor do I make them without proof.  But here are some of the quotes from a man that J Street says:

“J Street DC Metro, the DC Public Library and Americans for Peace Now are proud to sponsor Harris-Gershon's discussion, which will be followed by a Q&A and book signing. “

“Proud” to sponsor a discussion from a person who regularly uses his twitter account to “re-tweet” messages from Ali Abunimah of Electronic Intifada, Stephan Walt and Max Blumenthal amongst others? I mean nothing says that someone “loves” Israel like “re-tweeting” known anti-Semites and anti-Zionists. Right? 

Or how about this gem that Harris-Gershon “tweeted”:

David Harris-Gershon ‏@David_EHG Mar 3

If you think the world should boycott Russia over occupation, but Palestinians should not via-a-vis Israel, you have some explaining to do.

Now this is a particularly interesting tweet because Harris Gershon has been turned away from speaking in a few Jewish organizations because of his support for the anti-Semitic BDS Movement something that Mr. Harris-Gershon denies that he supports. Interestingly enough this denial came when he began his book / speaking tours to Jewish organizations. But that said, aside from his constant support for those who do favor BDS here are David’s exact words with regards to BDS:

“And I think about Israel's inability to stop the occupation on its own, about how the only way to stop it may be for outside pressures (emphasis mine) to bear down upon the country I love.

Sanctions. Boycotts. Divestments. (BDS)….

…. And so we come to the confession, to the coming out: as an American Jew invested deeply in Israel's success and survival -- which in turn drives my investment in stopping one of the greatest moral challenges of my generation: the occupation -- I have no choice but to formally endorse and embrace BDS…. (emphasis mine)

…. However, I know this for a fact: those who claim in Israel that there is no occupation have only one goal in mind: a single-state solution, a Jewishly-controlled Israel stretching from the Mediterranean Sea to the Jordan River.
And it's an unworkable, unsustainable goal that will be realized -- one state -- unless outside forces are brought to bear.”

Now… if this is not bad enough.. Harris-Gershon also engages in rhetoric that is reminiscent of the horrible Protocols of the Elders of Zion. Here is his commentary in an article at Daily Kos February 4^th, 2013 where Harris Gershon unleashes the old anti-Semitic canard of dual loyalty with these two comments: 

“The reason for this disproportionate, obsessive focus on Israel with no regard for U.S. troops in Afghanistan? Simple: AIPAC and the "pro-Israel" lobby's ill-founded concern about the Hagel nomination coupled by the lobby's disproportionate influence on our representatives to echo that concern.”(emphasis mine)

And

“But when the hawkish, "pro-Israel" lobby in America can influence our representatives to sound as if they – well – are representing Israel's citizens more than our own? (emphasis mine)

          We have a problem. A problem that must be discussed openly and honestly.”

Straight out conspiracy theory saying that America’s representatives are controlled by “Zionist Interests”… Where have we heard charges like that before and from whom?

SO… with that, I say “goodbye”, “so long”, “Shalom”, to J Street. Why would I support an organization that gives a platform (and is proud of that) to a person who espouses both anti-Zionism and in my opinion borderline anti-Semitic memes? Just as I would not belong to an organization that gave a platform to Gilad_Atzmon nor can I see my money or support going to an organization that would support and be “proud of” and having David Harris Gershon.

I cannot in good conscience support J Street IF this is the type of programming or this is the kind of speaker that they will sponsor. I wish things were different because I do support J Street’s general principles. However, when you give a platform to people like Harris Gershon. What are you really supporting?

Shalom,

A former friend.

More Authentic Indigenousness from the Non-Western Indigenous Brown People of the Middle East

We all know how Israel is a country full of boring patriarchal white Europeans, while the Arabs of the Middle East are exciting indigenous brown people who have a beautiful civilization.  Of course any negative aspects of Arab culture, such as occasionally treating women as less than equals, here and there celebrating people who strap on bombs and blow up children, and maybe once in a while flogging or killing someone suspected of being gay, must be due to Western colonialism and the indignity of having to live with Jews in their midst.

Nothing highlights this more than the recent controversy regarding Lebanese Winter Olympic Athlete Jacky Chamoun.  The ruckus erupted because Chamoun simply wanted to express her Indigenous liberated womanhood with some tasteful swimsuit photos.  Unfortunately, the orientalist men that run Lebanon are misinterpreting Islam, Christianity, and Arab culture as something that would frown on this.

First, some pictures of the lovely Ms. Chamoun:

First of all, let's marvel at how brown (tm) and totally non-white (tm) she totally is!!  I mean look at that red hair, light eyes, and pale skin!  No wonder those white Khazar Jews engage in apartheid (tm).

More importantly though, an adult woman doing something that is totally within her right and unrelated to her Olympic performance would only trigger an investigation in a country if that country had been the victim of Western colonialism and had to suffer the indignity of having Israel next door.  I mean how can a country be expected to treat its women and gays nicely when just over the border lousy Jews have transformed a desert and built a remarkable society at the forefront of science and technology?

If it wasn't for Israel and Jews, Jacky Chamoun, the brown indigenous brown person, would live in a country full of feminist indigenous brown people and be able to ski and pose for photographs in peace.  Alas, Israel ruins everything.

A CHALLANGE.....

Posted at The Times of Israel

Recently author David Harris Gershon posted on both Daily Kos and at Tikkun Daily that he was being forced to make a statement regarding Israel and his allegiances before they would allow him to speak there regarding his new book.

Now according to Mr. Harris Gershon was told by UCSB Hillel:

Make a political statement clarifying your position on the Boycott, Divestment, Sanctions (BDS) movement targeting Israel, and you may enter our building. Otherwise, you are not allowed within our walls.

As a result of this Mr. Harris Gershon responded to UCSB Hillel via his post on DKos and Tikkun by saying the following:

I am a progressive Zionist who believes firmly in the idea that Israel should be a Jewish, democratic state, despite the inherent challenges and contradictions such an existence presents. I am also one who fully supports a two-state political solution to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict in which each side is able to live within defined, secure borders.

I believe that economic sanctions, such as boycotts, are legitimate forms of nonviolent protest, in contrast to, say, violence or vandalism. I do not, however, subscribe to the BDS movement or its implicit vision of a single, bi-national state as a solution to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. While I am saddened by the fact that Palestinians do not have full academic freedoms, I do not support the academic boycott of Israeli universities and institutions as a productive tactic. And while I have written extensively on the suffering Israel’s continued occupation has brought upon Palestinians living in the West Bank, and while I support pressure being brought to bear upon Israel to reject its settlement enterprise and push toward a final peace agreement, I reject those anti-Semitic streams which unofficially surface within the BDS movement.

In short, when I endorsed the concept of boycotts and sanctions in 2012, my intention was not to join the BDS movement or endorse its outcome (as Haaretz noted). Rather, it was to express the idea that economic sanctions are a legitimate, nonviolent method for countering undesirable policies and change behavior, regardless of the country being targeted. (It’s a position U.S. politicians understand intimately with regard to Iran, and a position I knew would be difficult within the Jewish community.)

Immediately, myself a few others found ourselves challenging Mr. Harris Gershon in his statement for inconsistencies throughout his blogging within the last few years.

So with this, I challenge Mr. Harris Gershon (both at the Progressive Zionist and at Times of Israel) to clarify a number of his positions which up until now, he has not and seemingly will not clarify. AND following that,
I would challenge him to offer up solutions for discussion / debate. In this, I would happy to have him challenge my assertions that I laid out in my article at Times of Israel almost two months ago.

To start off with I will echo UCSB Hillel's concern, that a noted seemingly anti-Zionist author would want to use their venue as a place to advertise his book. Now David, claims that not only is he not anti-Zionist but that he is rather fully within the "Zionist Camp". SO with that in mind and given his statement above, I would like to know how he "squares the circle" with this commentary from 2012 where he stated:

”And so we come to the confession, to the coming out: as an American Jew invested deeply in Israel’s success and survival — which in turn drives my investment in stopping one of the greatest moral challenges of my generation: the occupation — I have no choice but to formally endorse and embrace BDS

 and

“As it is, I have long been uncertain about supporting such measures, afraid of the long-term damage a sustained BDS movement might do to Israel, and concerned about the anti-Israel motivations of segments who push to sanction Israel.

However, I know this for a fact: those who claim in Israel that there is no occupation have only one goal in mind: a single-state solution, a Jewishly-controlled Israel stretching from the Mediterranean Sea to the Jordan River.

Now I, like many others find the fact that David claims that this statement was meant to to only accept BDS as a "legitimate form of resistance" rather than for the Movement itself highly unbelievable. After all, David's twitter account features re-tweets from Omar Barghouti, Ali Abunimah, and Stephan Walt. Moreover, David knows the subject well and for him to say that he embraced BDS without realizing it was a movement is simply too much to believe.

But in any case I would ask Mr. Harris Gershon the following:

1. If you are indeed not a proponent of the BDS Movement, which of it's goals do you specifically not agree with?
2. Also regarding BDS here do you stand on the issue of Palestinian Right of Return? 

I am asking specific questions that I believe should have specific answers.

Again, so that we may have a fruitful discussion where each of us knows our base positions I would ask that you please let us know the following:

1.You stated in the Daily Kos Article in the comments section that you had not written anything regarding what you see as to a solution (or way forward towards a fair and real Two State Solution), but that you had written many things regarding Israel's trouble with Democracy. Why is that? Don't you have an eye towards a solution or are you just playing "the scold"

2. You often claim that you support the Two State Solution and that you would like to see Israel as a Jewish State, yet all you do is continuously criticize Israel and it's polity. Do you have anything positive to say about Israel and if so what would that be. In other words can you articulate to us just WHY you think Israel should continue to exist.

3. David, you have a sig. line at Daily Kos quoting Judith Butler regarding Israel. Now, keep in mind that Dr. Butler has stated that Hamas and Hizbollah are actually "Progressive" movements. Do you endorse her point of view here?

4. Do you feel that AIPAC actually rules the United States or that the "Jewish Lobby" is an un-American force? After all, you stated (and I quote exactly):

The reason for this disproportionate, obsessive focus on Israel with no regard for U.S. troops in Afghanistan? Simple: AIPAC and the “pro-Israel” lobby’s ill-founded concern about the Hagel nomination coupled by the lobby’s disproportionate influence on our representatives (emphasis added) to echo that concern.

 and 

But when the hawkish, “pro-Israel” lobby in America can influence our representatives to sound as if they – well – are representing Israel’s citizens more than our own?

We have a problem. A problem that must be discussed openly and honestly

5. You stated in a positive article regarding Germany's "moving on from the Holocaust" this little gem:

However, the painful truth is this: while Germany as a country and a societal entity has largely (though not entirely) moved beyond the historical atrocities committed by the Nazis, the same unfortunately cannot be said for Israel. (emphasis added)

Of course, there’s ample reason for this. Created in the wake of an unspeakable trauma and bordered by hostile nations, Israel (and Jewish Israelis) have perpetually been afraid for the country’s existence. The country has been obsessed by security concerns for over 60 years. And it is my view that, because of these factors, Israel has never had a chance to recover from a national, post-Holocaust PTSD that continues to fuel a self-perceived sense of collective victimhood despite its overwhelming military.

It is a collective sense of victimhood that has compelled Israel’s leaders to perpetually have their fingers on the trigger, and has been partially responsible for the human rights abuses and atrocities Israel continues to commit against the Palestinians.

It seems that you are suggesting that it is time for Israel to "Get over the Holocaust"? Can that be true?

Anyhow, your answering these questions in a clear and concise manner would go a long way towards creating dialogue. Myself and others are asking you clear up some possible misconceptions regarding your positions (if indeed they are misconceptions). Once we see these answers (particularly your ideas regarding Palestinian RoR - something you don't seem to want to discuss though I can't for the life of me figure out why), then we can have a forward seeing discussion on what possible solutions to the conflict in the Middle East.

So I challenge you to address these issues and from there move forward. Are you willing to take me up on that challenge and are you willing to discuss/debate possible policies and their outcomes?

You Can Fight Back Against the ASA Boycott

By now many of us are aware that the American Studies Association (ASA) has voted to boycott Israeli academic institutions.  We are also aware of how shameful and ludicrous this proposed boycott is.  To briefly recap:

1) Boycotting Israeli institutions while proposing to do no such thing with the worst human rights violators such as Iran, Saudi Arabia, Syria, Myanmar, Sudan, China, and others is simply antisemitic.

2) Academic boycotts are an assault on the idea of free inquiry, and punish and disable the very people who are essential for working toward a resolution of the conflict.

3) Boycotts of Israel are sponsored by the BDS movement which opposes a two-state solution to the conflict.

4) In spite of their name, the ASA is no longer a mainstream organization and most serious scholars left it in the 1980s and 1990s.

5) The proposed boycott was only approved by 1/4 of ASA's membership, yet the leadership persisted in endorsing it.

Fortunately, there IS something that well meaning individuals can do to fight back against this misuse and abuse of scholarship.

As discussed at the Legal Insurrection blog, the ASA relies on the support and implied credibility of its  83 "institutional members" which are a diverse array of universities and colleges.  As proposed by former Harvard University President Larry Summers, and already carried out by two institutions, Penn State University Harrisburg and Brandeis University, universities can resign their membership in the ASA and forbid the use of university funds for attending ASA meetings.

Such a move by many or all of the ASA's institutional members would effectively disable the organization and send a very powerful message that American higher education does not support a boycott of Israeli institutions or the BDS regime.

So, I urge anyone who is an alumnus of, or currently affiliated with, any of the 83 member institutions to contact their institution and encourage them to resign from the ASA and prohibit funds from being used to support it.

I will provide the list of institutions below so you can see if one of your alma maters or current institution is on it.  If it is, I suggest sending a message to the President, the President's Chief of Staff or similar, and the Director of Alumni Relations or similar.  Keep it polite and positive, and let them know how much the institution means to you.  Here is the message I sent to my undergrad alma mater, which is one of those on the list (feel free to copy relevant parts):

Dear President Sexton, Chief of Staff Baum, and Vice President Perillo,

I am contacting you as a proud NYU Alumnus (degree, school, year, major), booster, and donor.  I am concerned about the recent move by the American Studies Association (ASA) to boycott Israeli academic institutions, and would like to learn about NYU’s reaction and any response going forward, given that NYU is an institutional member of the ASA.

As I am sure you are aware, such boycotts are the antithesis of free academic inquiry, and also unfairly place blame solely on Israel for a complex regional conflict. 

It is a source of pride for me that NYU has a very active partnership with Israel via NYU Tel Aviv.  I assume that the NYU leadership is entirely opposed to this boycott move.  I would like to know if the University’s has formulated a strategy to counter it. 

I suggest a move that would be very appropriate and send a powerful message, which is to 1) withdraw NYU’s institutional membership in the ASA and 2) forbid the use of University funds to attend ASA events or to publish in ASA fora.  This is a strategy already undertaken by another ASA institutional member, Penn State University Harrisburg, and has been proposed by former Harvard University President Larry Summers. 

As I embark on my own academic career, my thoughts naturally turn to my alma mater NYU and its role as a leading global university in this context.  Please let me know the University’s opinions on this issue.

Sincerely,

name (school, year)

The institutional members of the ASA, as listed in the ASA's materials, are:

Alberta Institute for American Studies
Bard Graduate Center
Boston College
Boston University
Brandeis University
Brigham Young University
Brown University
California State University, Fullerton
California State University, Long Beach
Carnegie-Mellon University
Centre for the Study of the United States
College of Staten Island, CUNY
College of William and Mary
Cornell University
Crystal Bridge Museum of American Art
CUNY Graduate Center, American Studies Certificate Program
DePaul University
Dickinson College
Eccles Centre for American Studies, The British Library
Emory University
Fordham University
Franklin College of Indiana
George Washington University
Georgetown University
Hamilton College
Harvard University
Historical Society of Western Pennsylvania
Indiana University
Kennesaw State University
Kenyon College
Lehigh University
The Long Island Museum
Michigan State University, English Department
Middlebury College
New York University
Northwestern University
Penn State University, Harrisburg
Princeton University
Ramapo College
Richard Stockton College of New Jersey
Rider University
Roger Williams University
Rowan College of New Jersey
Rutgers University, New Brunswick
Saint John Fisher College
Saint Louis University
Saint Olaf College
Skidmore College
Smith College
Sophia University
St. Francis College
Stanford University, American Studies Program
Stanford University, Green Library
Stetson University
Students At The Center
Temple University
Trinity College, Hartford, CT.
Tufts University
University of Alabama
University of California, San Diego
University of Delaware
University of Hawaii
University of Iowa
University of Maryland, Baltimore County
University of Minnesota
University of Mississippi
University of New Mexico
University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill
University of Notre Dame
University of Oklahoma Honors College
University of Southern California
University of Southern Mississippi
University of Texas, Austin
University of Texas, Dallas
University of Utah
University of Western Ontario
University of Wyoming
Vanderbilt University
Vassar
Washington State University
Washington University, St. Louis
Western Connecticut State University
Willamette University
Winterthur Program in Early American Culture Youngstown State University

If one of your alma maters or current institution is on the list, you can take a stand for academic freedom and reasonably discourse about the Middle East.  Even if your institution is not an institutional member, you can still contact them to encourage the prohibition on university resources being used for ASA events.  If we encourage our institutions to push back, we can strike a decisive blow against academic boycotts of Israel.