May 27, 2008
Column: On Israel and the US campaign bus
“Thrown under the bus” is becoming the phrase of the American presidential election. It describes the moment when a candidate disowns an embarrassing supporter or adviser.
Campaign camp-followers can find themselves staring at the dreaded underside of the bus for any number of reasons. Barack Obama, the probable Democratic party candidate, committed the most famous act of bus-related violence when he finally disowned the Rev Jeremiah Wright – his spiritual mentor. John McCain, the Republican candidate, has had to rid himself of various advisers who were too close to lobbyists.
Two recent incidents illustrate that making controversial remarks about Israel is particularly risky.
The remainder of this column can be read here. Please post comments below.
</
GR,
Congratulations for tackling a potentially difficult subject with an insightful, objective analysis. I am sure that once the usual crew register that you have written on this we will see a slew of comments about how the Zionists control US policy so of course the US are not going to talk to Hamas etc, but this argument doesn’t stand up when you compare the administration’s stance to the stance of the Israelis themselves.
This will be one of the key areas of interest after the US elections - whoever wins. Will it be more damaging to keep the current promotion of democracy agenda - albeit in a slightly watered- down form, or to ditch it for the realpolitik of old?
My view is that realpolitik will be the main game in town, but I think promotion of democracy will be a strong undercurrent, even if for no better reason than the remaining commitment to Iraq.
Posted by: AYC | May 27th, 2008 at 11:18 am | Report this commentSpot on and welcome piece. With Obama one had had reason to think the public debate in the US may advance. It still may, but, as his clear alignment with AIPAC’s agenda during recent days confirms, his next warm-vowelled speech on the matter will not be the credible catalyst for any change on that side of the Pond.
Posted by: WCM | May 27th, 2008 at 11:32 am | Report this commentQuote
Jon Alterman, head of the Middle East programme at the Center for Strategic and International Studies, a Washington think-tank, says: “I can’t remember a time in the last half century where the US has had so little influence in the region.”
Unquote
The reason is simple. America has ceased to pursue her own national interests and sacrificed them to those of the rightwing Israeli politics. This has happened due to the combined influence of the Christian Right, the openly pro-Israel lobby (AIPAC, JINSA, ADL etc.) and the NeoCons whose agenda is primarily the promotion of the most egregious Zionist interests and overlap heavily with the openly Zionist lobby.
This has led to the bizarre situation where the debate in Israel is more open than the one in America and that Israel can talk to Hamas and Hezbollah but the US can’t.
The US will continue to lose influence unless she deals with those who have attained power within the US but are entirely beholden to a foreign entity.
Best,
P
Posted by: Pacifist | May 27th, 2008 at 2:02 pm | Report this commentUS is losing influence in ME? No a chance at the moment. Yes US does not sponsor talking and meeting. But thousands of soldiers and billions of USD of arm sales can hardly be ignored.
Posted by: jin | May 27th, 2008 at 2:45 pm | Report this commentIn response to all the above predictable anti-Israel invective (I am no suppporter of Israel’s policy toward the Palestinians either, but, as GR points out, there are rational voices within Israel, and demonizing the Jewish state is just as bad as giving it unqualified support), I would like to suggest that we should all give Barack Obama a break.
Israel is the third rail of US politics. If Obama were to issue a single syllable critical of Israel during the campaign, it would be the end of his presidential hopes, even more surely than if he were to announce that he would appoint Jeremiah Wright as his personal White House chaplain if elected, that he would take the oath of office on the Koran, and that he would set up a White House reception and dinner with Hamas. (In fact, a sizable number of American voters most likely believe that he will do all of the above anyway).
This doesn’t even take into account the traditional anti-black prejudice that, let us be honest, is still rampant among some sectors of the Jewish community, especially elderly Jewish voters. I know. I grew up in that community myself, and visited Israel several times when I was a student. Even to this day, I do not dare to say a word critical of Israel to some of my oldest lifelong friends and relatives. Let us not expect Barack Obama to do the impossible, at least not during the presidential campaign.
Posted by: algasema | May 27th, 2008 at 2:49 pm | Report this commentI am shocked and appalled - shocked and appalled!- when presidential politics stray so irresponsibly, even one iota, from the one essential issue facing America specifically and humanity in general: Israel and ant-Semitism, which we are all guilty of unless, in the unlikely event, we may be reluctantly found temporarily perhaps innocent - until proven otherwise of course.
Posted by: Paskalis | May 27th, 2008 at 4:18 pm | Report this commentPaskalis, I’m shocked and appalled at your grammar. “…which we are all guilty of…” should of course read: “…of which we are all guilty…”. Buck up, old son.
Posted by: AYC | May 27th, 2008 at 4:31 pm | Report this commentGR”Hagee story does not have many policy implications. Not so with the Obama campaign’s decision to get rid of Robert Malley, an adviser on the Middle East.”
Hagee’s political role was a neo-con creation. He heads up a “pro-Israel” organization, called Christians United for Israel. There are many such organizations consisting of radical Christian Zionists,and writers/readers of “Commentary” and “The Weekley Standard” neoconservatives, and right-wing Jewish leaders in congress and in organizations. This alliance was formed to “get out the vote” for Republicans and a few hardline Democrats and also to lobby and even impose their extremist views on the Middle East on US foreign policy. They are also the ones that were whipped up to attack Malley. Their never ending activism and their neo-con journalists “leaders” have given the American people the idea that their extremists positions are the only correct positions for the Middle East.
I think it was a mistake for Obama to disown Power and Malley. Obama could have used both controversies to tell us more about himself and his foreign policy positions…and show he was loyal to people who would to hell and back for him.
The reality in the ME is that there are negotiations going on mostly thru back channels but they are going on…with Hamas, with Syria and with Hezbollah…Israel’s army radio claims “is truth to Hizbullah chief Na’srallah’s assertion that a prisoner swap deal with Israel is imminent”.
Hezbollah coup was a watershed event. It was truly the end of US policies and influence dominating the Middle East. As these were neo-con policies, that is very good.
Obama is in a tough position in the campaign. Americans have been brainwashed and fed disinformation about the Middle East and Not only did McCain attempt to mischaraterize his positions but Hillary did too in the most ugly way by inferring that he just does not understand the real world while SHE and MCCain do!…
However, when the going gets tough the tough get going…instead of “aping” AIPAC’s wrongheaded positions, he should lead us where we need to go…there are many supporters of Israel and people who care about the future of the ENTIRE region who would help him get the right words out …he should start by calling on “J Street”
This was a great article GR!…I have e-mailed it around it to everyone I know!
Posted by: Lisa-Helene Lawson | May 27th, 2008 at 4:45 pm | Report this commentPaskalis…Soon you’ll be accused of having “impure thoughts” and hung, drawn and quartered for your alleged thought crime!
Posted by: Pacifist | May 27th, 2008 at 5:00 pm | Report this commentIn Spanish they call the over enthusiastic “más papista que el papa”, more papist than the Pope. The famous American “Jewish lobby” comes under that category… many Israelis dread them, like Irish people dread the pro-IRA, Irish Americans.
The secret is that intermediating for Israel allows the lobby a lot of power in Washington that they otherwise wouldn’t have… the power in Washington is what it’s all about, not really the welfare of Israel
Posted by: David Seaton | May 27th, 2008 at 5:10 pm | Report this commentThis is the article we have all been waiting for. At last, after months of beating around the bush, after having to endure endless debate on boring and inconsequential issues such as: a resurgent Russia; The Rise of China; energy security etc etc — at last we are back to our favourite and most pressing topic: Jews, lobbying and Israel! This is what this blog was meant to be, even if it pretends otherwise. This is what political science is about.
I have to add that I agree with Paskalis — as an inheritor of Christian culture, you are indeed guilty of anti-Semitism until proven otherwise:
“So the last shall be first and the first last: for many be called but few chosen.”
Posted by: RCS | May 27th, 2008 at 6:25 pm | Report this commentRCS, with all due respect, as someone who is descended from a long line of Jewish scholars (or so my family always claimed), I have to ask whether it is not just slightly over the top to claim that every “inheritor of Christian culture” is presumed guilty of anti-Semitism. Isn’t that, at least in one sense, the same as saying that the Jews are guilty for the death of Christ - exactly the alleged element in “Christian culture” to which I presume you would have the greatest objection?
Posted by: algasema | May 27th, 2008 at 7:34 pm | Report this commentalgasema:I have to ask whether it is not just slightly over the top to claim that every “inheritor of Christian culture” is presumed guilty of anti-Semitism.”
I agree! This is an outlandish statement. Reminds me of some irresponsible sick post of Michael Ledeen’s in Feb 07 at Pajama Media “The Europeans Aren’t Indifferent, They Just Hate Jews”
http://pajamasmedia.com/michaelledeen/2007/02/18/the_europeans_arent_indifferen/
Moreover, the neo-cons revved up Christian fundalmentalist so that the neo-cons could boost and advance THEIR (i.e., the neo-cons) positions and agenda in the Republic Party in Foreign Affairs. The Fundalmentalists are not representative of most Christian America. There are many Christian groups that are working with both Palestinian and Iraqi refugees and have a totally different view of the Israel- Palestinian conflict and the US led invasion of Iraq. However these same Christians are suporters of Israel but do not support the occupation of the West Bank and Gaza and certainly DO NOT SUPPORT the Gaza Blockade.
Posted by: Lisa-Helene Lawson | May 27th, 2008 at 8:28 pm | Report this commentalso sorry for all typos … but you get my drift …first post had a girlfriend’s baby in my lap at my latte cafe and now busy with something but could not ignore where this conversation was going…
Posted by: Lisa-Helene Lawson | May 27th, 2008 at 8:33 pm | Report this commentIf it is arguably suicidal for Israel to talk to Hamas and Syria, it is arguably homicidal for the US to talk. The US doing something that might have dreadful consequences for Israel is more objectionable than Israel doing something that might have dreadful consequences for Israel because the US is less likely to be careful.
Posted by: James A. Donald | May 27th, 2008 at 10:05 pm | Report this commentalgasema, Lisa-Helene,
Many are not personally anti-semitic, yet they cannot fully escape their cultural background. Anti-semitism is deeply ingrained in Europe, even if in disrepute. You encounter it every which way you go, like Swiss people wanting to compliment you saying: “you are not really a Jew!”
Posted by: RCS | May 28th, 2008 at 2:16 am | Report this commentWell, as long as it has become acceptable to throw supporters under the bus perhaps McCain should consider doing just that to Senator Joe Lieberman who is joined at the hip to his campaign…(in fact I still believe he is the one who told him he should seek Hagee’s endorsement) Hagee’s “followers” are staging a Wa. DC event in July, an “Israel Summit” and Lieberman will deliver the keynote address at their banquet dinner!!!!
Posted by: Lisa-Helene Lawson | May 28th, 2008 at 3:01 am | Report this commentRCS:”Many are not personally anti-semitic, yet they cannot fully escape their cultural background. Anti-semitism is deeply ingrained in Europe”
RCS,
There are thoughtless careless people everywhere …there are people who range from intolerant to real haters…everywhere…venting it at gays, Arabs, poor immigrants,… you see little to no Jew bashing… you do see Israel bashing over the wars in Lebanon and this horrid 40 year occupation…that is not going to stop until the occupation ends …but that is NOT being anti-semitic to object to political practices of Israel…
when I lived in Israel I once went to the office of the The Jerusalem Post, some Rabbi Kahane people were there protesting a story about a kindergarten that was designed for Jewish ,Muslim and Christian children…as I tried to enter they began to harass me until my Israeli boyfriend showed up and punched one of them in the nose and the others started chanting “let the shiksa pass” and one spit at me…he got punched in the nose too!
As for your assertion that anti -Semitism is deeply ingrained in Europe…
Posted by: Lisa-Helene Lawson | May 28th, 2008 at 3:30 am | Report this commentaccording to a professor friend of mine at JTS…Germany now has one of the fastest growing populations many are Israelis (sabras) choosing to leaving Israel for Germany…
should read :Germany now has one of the fastest growing Jewish populations, many are Israelis (sabras) choosing to leaving Israel for Germany…
Posted by: Lisa-Helene Lawson | May 28th, 2008 at 3:32 am | Report this commentYou are right Lisa. After all ashkenazis are originally germans so it is logical they want to go back to their homeland…Germany.
Posted by: Enrique | May 28th, 2008 at 3:39 am | Report this commentExcellent column. The fact of the matter is that the range of topics and opinions that national politicians can have in the USA is still tightly constrained by the extreme right-wing agenda we have been living under since the Reagan years. The rabid, nut-case Christian right so well portrayed by Mr. Hagee combined with the equal rabid right-wing Israeli lobby - well analyzed by Profs. Mearsheimer and Walt - have almost universally dictated American foreign policy. The Christian right on the Republican Party, the Israeli lobby on both Democrats and Republicans. Your column describes perfectly the level of absurdity we have reached.
Posted by: Wendell Murray | May 28th, 2008 at 4:24 am | Report this comment“You are right Lisa. After all ashkenazis are originally germans so it is logical they want to go back to their homeland…Germany.”
Oh please Enrigue, I am so not into your race theories! …you appear to think race drives all politics everywhere and anywhere…I don’t believe that… I said Germany now has one of the fastest growing Jewish populations, many are Israelis (sabras) choosing to leaving Israel for Germany…who the heck knows where their parents and grandparents came from!…I suspect from all over the place…N. Africa, E. Europe, Soviet Union and some are children with one Sephardic parent and one ashkenazis parent…give it a break!
I need to go read my print FT, it’s evening and been a hectic day! Toodles!
Posted by: Lisa-Helene Lawson | May 28th, 2008 at 4:36 am | Report this commentLisa-Helene, I admire your self - control if you can wait until the evening to read your print FT. If mine is not under the door of my apartment by 7:00 am sharp, I am at risk of going ballistic and threatening to obliterate whomever is responsible for distributing the papers that day, even without help from Hillary Clinton.
Posted by: algasema | May 28th, 2008 at 4:50 am | Report this commentalgasema,
Posted by: Lisa-Helene Lawson | May 28th, 2008 at 5:30 am | Report this commentThe problem with my print FT is that I check in so much during the day the I am usually re-reading stuff I read in the last 24 hours on the web! I have given up a subscription to every print paper but never FT!…FT and Lattes are forever! just as my day is crazy today, it will be my print FT and a glass of wine tonight! Good Night!
Who needs a print copy? The internet edition can be accessed from work or home, without need to carry a copy. There is no ink to stain your fingers, and no need to wait for delivery.
Save the forests — use the internet.
Posted by: RCS | May 28th, 2008 at 6:13 am | Report this commentIsrael is a third rail because an electorally substantial number of Christians believe that the 2nd coming of Christ is contingent upon several historical events one of which is Israel’s existence. Many if not most Israelis who are aware of this would much rather be supported for being the sole liberal democracy and sole dependable ally in the region than for being part of “god’s plan”.
That’s also the view of most Jewish voters and of a much wider swath of the American electorate who support Israel but not religiously.
This really is about a very sensitive Christian dogma rather than about Israel itself. The intense emotions around the religious angle have finished off many politicians, it requires the same sensitivity as resolving issues around free speech and Mohammed cartoons. There’s no escaping that.
For Jews it is also painful to have the debate about ones country and ones national aspirations hijacked by a group of 2nd coming adventurists who manage to cast ones security in terms of their deliverance. Sadly enough many Jews dislike Israel more for the religious taint projected upon it by such Christians than for how it ascertains itself.
And Israel really doesn’t need religion to ascertain its right.
Posted by: Felix Drost | May 28th, 2008 at 9:17 am | Report this commentLisa, “Reminds me of some irresponsible sick post of Michael Ledeen’s in Feb 07 at Pajama Media “The Europeans Aren’t Indifferent, They Just Hate Jews””
I agree this IS over the top. But think back - the Jews have never had a happy time in Europe. For at least the past 1000 years through the Crusades, pogroms, boycotts, expulsions, massacres, historical revisionism, racial supremacy theories, blood libels and social exclusion, the Jews have been pushed from country to country never quite at home anywhere. So I would not say that his point is totally detached from reality.
And why do you persist in regurgitating Hamas propaganda - Gaza also has an EGYPTIAN border as well. They are ALSO boycotting Hamas. So how does that make Gaza totally Israel’s problem? Please explain.
Enrique: Once again you demonstrate your total ignorance. Ashkenazis are not all from Germany. Try Poland, Hungary, Russia, France etc etc. And their homeland is Israel.
Felix: spot on, once again.
Posted by: AYC | May 28th, 2008 at 10:14 am | Report this commentYes, neocons and christian-zionists never talk about “Christianity” but about “Judeo-christianity”; never say “christians” but “judeo-christians”; never use the words “Christian Civilisation” but “Judeo-christian Civilisation”…easy to know when you are in front of them, he, he.
Posted by: Enrique | May 28th, 2008 at 10:14 am | Report this commentAYC, but they all speak a german dialect called “ashkenazi” and traditionally “Ashkenaz” is broadly the former Roman-Germanic Empire in the same way “Sepharad” is Spain, or better, Hispania (including Portugal)
Posted by: Enrique | May 28th, 2008 at 10:17 am | Report this commentA really good diagnostics of some aspects of the us political process.
It also took some courage. It is telling that it did take courage.
I am om the same wave length with WCM on this. I believe if Obama does not follow a policy that forces the israeli
hawks back to the 1967 borders he will sink to irrelevance as far as the ME is concerned.
The fact that an appreciable part of the US electorate has these irrational views on current history (Armageddonites,fundamentalists of various varieties) is also a concern. As much a concern as other fundamentalists elsewhere.
There is an ongoing “crime against humanity of large proportons” as pr Carter described the occupation and the siege against 1.5million palestinians. This is a real foreign policy problem for a state which claims
to base its policy oh human rights.
The various groups who have highjacked
the us policy in the ME should be denounced. The spectacle of a fauning
speaker of the US house of representatives paying homage to Olmert is in fact digusting.
In secular world the statement “There is an a-priori presumptiom” that all christians are antisemitic is pure non-sense”.
Posted by: Cassandra | May 28th, 2008 at 10:21 am | Report this commentCuriosly one of my uncles from the Southern Spanish region of Extremadura (around a village called Plasencia) and whose last name was “Mohedano” was sefardite. Even if his community was christianised after the Inquisition they kept getting married among themselves for centuries until my uncle married my aunt. And their children thought their last name and origin was originally “arabic”, he,he. But me, and later, their father told my cousins that no, it was, sephardic.
Posted by: Enrique | May 28th, 2008 at 10:25 am | Report this commentIf it is true that anti-Semitism is universal and constant as we are told, why is it so? Every nation, every religion every political system, every age has been relentlessly guilty of anti-Semitism. Even many Jews are anti-Semitic. Seriously, could the better-informed tutor me as a public service (probably tax deductible).
Posted by: Paskalis | May 28th, 2008 at 10:26 am | Report this commentDear Paskalis,
Someone once said that “the term anti-semite was used to describe people who hated the Jews; however it is now used by the Zionists to call people whom they hate”.
He probably was a bit simplistic.
Charges of antisemitism are deployed to stifle any rational, let alone critical, discussions of the actions of the state of Israel. It is a brazen tactic of intimidation and sensorship in the supposedly free Western polities and has ensnared the Americans in a major and regrettable way.
All the best,
P
Posted by: Pacifist | May 28th, 2008 at 11:26 am | Report this commentMy uncle was a “marrano”, one of those jews who were given the choice to “christianise or leave” by the Catholic Kings in 1492…and they chose to christianise and stay in Spain; but the endogamy of his community continued for almost 500 years (the two last names of my uncle were the same, Mohedano, as his parents were cousins) until my uncle married my aunt.
Posted by: Enrique | May 28th, 2008 at 11:39 am | Report this comment“On Israel, the US campaign bus” and the journalist
Sir,
Among the factors that constrain american’s debate on issues linked to Israel, you have surprisingly omitted to mention the omnipotent role of the American jewish community in the financing a multi-millions dollars presidential campaign.
Unless you considered the risk to be yourself “thrown under the bus” ?
Posted by: Gregory | May 28th, 2008 at 12:15 pm | Report this commentHi Enrique,
I am surprised that Spaniards keep their identities for so long. Is your case typical?
Frankly, I have no idea who and where my ancestors were in 1492 and what religion they practised. For all I know, they may not have even lived in the present-day Iran as we have been subject to so many invasions and mass immigrations. This is the case with practically any other Iranian I know.
Best,
P
Posted by: Pacifist | May 28th, 2008 at 12:21 pm | Report this commentWith regard to prejudice in Europe, I am reminded of a visit to Germany over forty years ago when my German host urged me to be careful not to have anything stolen by the Turks, who were already numerous in Germany then.
And the most succinct comment I can remember about anti-Semitism was one by a teenage French-Jewish girl whom I met in Paris some fifty-five years ago, when I was still a teenager myself. She said simply: “Dans tous les pays il y en a.”
Posted by: algasema | May 28th, 2008 at 12:51 pm | Report this commentHi Algasema,
My French isn’t up to much but is that sentence complete?
The most racist thing I heard from a Frenchman (whose English was v good) was this: “All the rapes in France are committed by the Algerians. A Frenchman never rapes a woman”.
Gently, I had to recite a few facts about the Algerian war of independence!
BTW, he was not a skinhead and he was quite highly educated (at the time he was doing a postgrad degree in England, having got several bits of paper from French unis.)
Best,
P
Posted by: Pacifist | May 28th, 2008 at 1:00 pm | Report this commentPacifist,
It is not my case, but the case of my uncle. As far as I remember my ancestors are Catholic from Northern Spain.
Posted by: Enrique | May 28th, 2008 at 1:34 pm | Report this commentIt is a complete sentence, Pacifist, meaning “It exists in every country.” I agree that a high level of education is not necessarily protection against bias. To the contrary, it can help someone to invent even more elaborate rationalizations for prejudice.
America is seeing a good deal of this in today’s immigration debate, and, I should imagine, this is not exactly unknown in discussions of immigration in Europe as well.
I also remember a Harvard classmate some fifty years ago, who happened to be from Germany, explainng to me patiently that while, of course, no one supported Hitler, something had needed to be done about all the Jewish bankers who had allegedly been controlling the German economy.
Posted by: algasema | May 28th, 2008 at 1:41 pm | Report this commentI meant: “explaining”.
Posted by: algasema | May 28th, 2008 at 1:45 pm | Report this commentPerhaps one day Israel will have the irrelevance of a country of just 7 million people and the size of Connecticut.
Posted by: Enrique | May 28th, 2008 at 2:26 pm | Report this commentAll this discussion about racism and Enrique’s ancesters makes me wonder now who I really am.
Might it be a good idea to have a DNA-Profile done? I read in the German press that Harvard Med. School has a a machine that will do the job - a “Polonator G 007″ (sounds like a new James Bond movie) and a Profile costs USD10 000 (that’s equivalent to the same number of CHF right now). But these P G 007s will eventually be shrunk to the size of a toaster, so I’ll hang on a bit. In the meantime the USD will probably recover massively. Sod’s Law (as the Brits say).
Posted by: J.J. | May 28th, 2008 at 2:28 pm | Report this commentPacifist. Re Frenchmen don’t rape. They are adept at sweet talk, though. When I was in Paris as a student for 3 months, I was lodged with the family of a French pharmacist. One evening soon after my arrival, I was writing some French exercises in their study/library room and the son of the family came in, and looked over my shoulder to check what I had written. He pointed out that I had misspelt the word “oeuf” and he commented that there was a French saying that “A kiss without a moustache is like a boiled egg without salt”. I turned round giggling and said “C’est drôle, ça” and then, looking up at him, realised of course that he had a small moustache.
Posted by: J.J. | May 28th, 2008 at 2:43 pm | Report this commentRCS, I suppose you are right about the irrelevance of print editions. Probably, one day, the FT print edition will also disappear. Despite the importance of our forests, I am so addicted to print newspapers that I can only hope that if the FT ever takes such a step, it will be after I am no longer around.
Posted by: algasema | May 28th, 2008 at 2:56 pm | Report this commentAYC,”I agree this IS over the top. But think back - the Jews have never had a happy time in Europe…. So I would not say that his point is totally detached from reality.”
His point is always detached from reality except that of conflict. Of course it is over the top it was written by Dr. Disinformation …I assume you have some understanding of the author.
Felix:”Many if not most Israelis who are aware of this would much rather be supported for being the sole liberal democracy and sole dependable ally in the region than for being part of “god’s plan”.
That is true about Israel. It was Neo-cons that created and cultivated the alliance with the crazy Christian Zionists to advance their political agenda.
Posted by: Lisa-Helene Lawson | May 28th, 2008 at 3:24 pm | Report this commentThe neo-con political agenda is the real threat to Israel…much more of a threat than coming to an agreement, tacit or other with Hamas, or Syria or Hezbollah and Iran.
Noooooooo… you still need a paper in your hand as you sip a latte…it’s not the same “feel” with a laptop …it’s just not the same…that is what I am off to do …hit my cafe with print FT for my non-fat extra hot extra foam latte…
Posted by: Lisa-Helene Lawson | May 28th, 2008 at 3:28 pm | Report this commentLisa, “The neo-con political agenda is the real threat to Israel…”.
Really. And you’re putting that ahead of Ahmagonnanukeya’s plans? Or Al Qaradawi’s fatwas? The propaganda, reminiscent of Nazi Germany, currently infesting the minds of the young in the middle east? Or the attempts to delegitimize Israel by the Marxist left, the so-called liberal elite and their morally bankrupt fellow-travellers are you?
Posted by: AYC | May 28th, 2008 at 3:42 pm | Report this commentPaskalis wrote: “If it is true that anti-Semitism is universal and constant as we are told, why is it so? Every nation, every religion every political system, every age has been relentlessly guilty of anti-Semitism. Even many Jews are anti-Semitic. Seriously, could the better-informed tutor me as a public service (probably tax deductible).”
Paskalis,
Your sentiments only strengthen my argument that members of many Christian groups can be considered a-priori anti-Semitic (thank you Cassandra for nicely formulating it thus).
Cassandra,
The above is not negated in our “secualr” age. As you most certainly know, religiously centred anti-semitism was in modern times transformed into the even more rabid race-centred type. It is naive to believe that aspects of Christian culture do not persist under the guise of secularism (just as aspects of paganism persisted under the guise of Christianity).
Paskalis,
Your statements are not true. Historically anti-Semitism has not been such a world embracing phenomemon. Anti-Semitism originated and evolved in the Christian world (the fact that in modern times, for reasons of modern political conflict in the ME, it has been hijacked by many Islamist groups, does not negate this assertion). Anti-semitism has always been coupled with Christianity. It is said that those we fear/loath the most are those which are most similar to us. Thus, Communists hated Democratic Socialists more than any capitalist. In the same way, the Christian church always had a tortured relationship with Judaism and the Jews. What a pity that Constatine institutionalised the early religion. Had not Jesus said: “Render unto Caesar the things which are Caesar’s, and unto God the things that are God’s.”
I hope you have earned your tax deduction (Jewish thinking on my part).
Enrique,
Phew! That was close. Good thing for you it is only your uncle.
Posted by: RCS | May 28th, 2008 at 3:43 pm | Report this commentAYC: “Lisa, “The neo-con political agenda is the real threat to Israel…”. Really…”
YES! Really!
Here is David Kimche on AIPAC and neo-cons:
“On the face it, that sounds great for Israel. The problem lies both in its interpretation of the best interests of Israel and in its method of delivering its message. In truth we have today a situation in which the dog’s tail is wagging the dog. AIPAC has become more militant than the Israeli government. Its messages reflect more the oppositionist Likud doctrine than the moderate stance of Prime Minister Olmert. Moreover, whereas the American Jewish community is known for its liberal, progressive pro-Democrat party heritage - some 80 percent of the Jewish voters traditionally cast their votes for the Democrats - AIPAC is geared to an extreme-right-wing agenda, often more in line with the Jewish neo-cons than with the majority of American Jews. ”
David Kimche has a better understanding of Israel’s security needs than anyone here does, and he has said its time to talk…the neo-cons will lead Israel into wars that they cannot win…real wars and public relations wars..
and you can continue to ignore Gaza and the brutal occupation and the role the occupation has had in making the situation what it is but that will not solve anything or make Isarel safer and more secure.
Posted by: Lisa-Helene Lawson | May 28th, 2008 at 4:32 pm | Report this commentDear JJ,
1-) Did you kiss the Frenchman or did you tell him while you may not be able to spell “ouef” in French, you knew an “oaf”,in the English sense, when you saw one?
2-) It is said that the next quantum leap in archaeology is going to come from DNA analyses of populations and how they moved around the world and where their ancestry came from. I can see those who claim a right of “return” to various places ending up with some egg on their faces (moustache or no moustache!)
best,
P
Posted by: Pacifist | May 28th, 2008 at 4:34 pm | Report this comment“MOSCOW, May 28 (RIA Novosti) - The European Court of Human Rights has ruled that Russia cannot extradite to Colombia an Israeli national accused by Bogota of conspiracy to commit terrorism, the defendant’s lawyer said on Wednesday.
The Strasbourg court “has prohibited Russia from extraditing Yair Klein to Colombia pending the court’s further instructions,” Dmitry Yampolsky said. Later on Wednesday, a spokeswoman for the organization said on the phone that “the court demanded that Yair Klein should not be extradited.”
Very interesting development. Israel (and this US administration) really wants back their monster back in Israel …and for good reason!…all right! let them have him but ONLY if they free Marwan Barghouti…
Posted by: Lisa-Helene Lawson | May 28th, 2008 at 4:53 pm | Report this commentLisa, “David Kimche has a better understanding of Israel’s security needs than anyone here does, and he has said its time to talk…the neo-cons will lead Israel into wars that they cannot win…real wars and public relations wars….and you can continue to ignore Gaza and the brutal occupation…”
So tell me, when was the last time the neo-cons expressed a will to wipe Israel off the map? When was the last time they tried to delegitimise Israel? When was the last time they threatened Israel in any way?
I appreciate the point you are somewhat clumsily attempting to make, but I think you should sort out Israel’s real enemies from your preferred ones.
And as I pointed out above, if there really were a “brutal occupation”, how many rockets would have been fired at Sderot? The thousands there have been?
Think the Egyptians or Jordanians would have stood for anything like the terrorist tactics Hamas is engaged in currently before those respective countries were kicked out of Gaza and the West Bank in ‘67? Course not. They would have massacred everyone in sight, and no one would have batted an eyelid.
And I’m curious as to your views on Egypt’s part in the Gaza shutdown.
Posted by: AYC | May 28th, 2008 at 5:00 pm | Report this commentAYC,
Posted by: Lisa-Helene Lawson | May 28th, 2008 at 5:27 pm | Report this commentEgypt has its own security concerns…and then there is the little matter that the US keeps blackmailing them by threatening to reduce aid if they dont stomp on Gaza …BTW, they are trying to play a constructive role now but they were brutal oppressors of Gazans also….the 40 years of Israel’s occupation has created the violent extremist political climate in Gaza…Gazan babies are not born violent…I know something about this …you do not… Go to Gaza …it is an impossible situation…a whole generation of children are being stunted by malnutrition…
Hey AYC,
Another new nugget of info on clerical intermarriages. It has just been announced that Khomeini’s grandson is marrying Sistani’s granddaughter.
I am sure the Daily Telegraph and Debkafiles (is there a difference?) will construe this as a dastardly plot by the Iranians to unite Iran and Iraq under a theorcratic Shia dynasty.
No doubt this means that McCain should bomb Iran whilst Lieberman sings the Hava Nagila and does backflips!
Mazel Tov,
P
Posted by: Pacifist | May 28th, 2008 at 5:31 pm | Report this commentP wrote: “It is said that the next quantum leap in archaeology is going to come from DNA analyses of populations and how they moved around the world and where their ancestry came from. I can see those who claim a right of “return” to various places ending up with some egg on their faces (moustache or no moustache!).”
P,
Not at all. I think your assertion is correct and it is evident even without DNA analysis.
Posted by: RCS | May 28th, 2008 at 5:32 pm | Report this commentLisa: “Egypt are trying to play a constructive role now…I know something about this …you do not”. Clearly you have no idea what you are taling about if that is the best you can come up with. Don’t choke on your latte sweetheart.
Pacifist, please pass on my best wishes to them. May they have long, peaceful lives free from the bigotry and intolerance all too often displayed in the upper echelons of the Iranian elite.
Posted by: AYC | May 28th, 2008 at 5:44 pm | Report this commentI am weak on the subject, RCS, which is why I asked for guidance. I suspect that “anti-Semitism is a modern, possibly post-war, term that is connected to the Holocaust. The conflicts, limitations and prejudices against the Jews in the pre-Christian and Hellenistic empires are well-known, so we cannot characterize it as as a Christian phenomenon. Even in Christian Europe and secular America, we can ask what its causes were.
Since it exists, we are told, in Islamic societies, what are it’s causes? Is it parthenogenic? Does it have no sociological, historical or political roots? That the Muslims “hijacked” anti-Semitism as if it were an Airbus 300-320 on the way to Disneyland is a simile beyond my poor powers of imagination. Is there nothing in the social structure of the Jewish communities that may have made them objects of prejudice? Was their behaviour always above the slightest reproach? Is it today? Is there causality everywhere in the universe except in this subject?
The “They hate us because we’re free” explanation is adequate only for the inadequate.
Posted by: Paskalis | May 28th, 2008 at 5:52 pm | Report this commentAYC, would you care to explain exactly how your ungracious (to put it mildly) “latte” comment toward Lisa-Helene Lawson adds to the intellectual force of your argument? Is this the way you define “civility”?
Posted by: algasema | May 28th, 2008 at 5:58 pm | Report this commentPaskalis, “Is there nothing in the social structure of the Jewish communities that may have made them objects of prejudice?”.
The logical line of thinking that led to the final solution. Who do you think you are, Julius Streicher? Himmler? The author of the protocols? You play too dumb, and by doing so expose your own prejudices and inadequacies.
Posted by: AYC | May 28th, 2008 at 6:06 pm | Report this commentAlgasema, you’re right. It detracts from the point I was making…a weakness of mine perhaps.
Posted by: AYC | May 28th, 2008 at 6:09 pm | Report this commentThank You Algasema! You are our one gallant soul here! But his retort/reaction did not surprise me…It is not the first time that he has belittled someone or displayed meaness…my guess is it won’t be the last.
Posted by: Lisa-Helene Lawson | May 28th, 2008 at 6:21 pm | Report this commentPaskalis: “Is there nothing in the social structure of the Jewish communities that may have made them objects of prejudice?”
That is a very bad comment, Paskalis. That is blaming the victim. I think I explained enough, you can re-read my passages. Anti-Semitism didn’t exist before the advent of Christianity. If the Romans were prejudiced towards the Jews, that can be easily understood in the context of the repeated insurgencies in Palestine. Anyway, they soon forgot of their prejudice as they became obsessed with Christians. Therefore, pre-Christian “anti-Semitism” is not anti-Semitism in the way that word is used today — a visceral irrational hatred directed specifically against Jews. Anti-semitism is a Christian-derived phenomenon, which in modern times has dressed itself in a secular guise, and has lately been transported to Muslim lands.
Historically, Islam was relatively tolerant towards “the People of the Book”, a term referring to both Christians as well as Jews. So your racist suggestion that anti-Semitism has something to do with the “structure of the Jewish communities” is disproved.
Posted by: RCS | May 28th, 2008 at 6:29 pm | Report this commentThis may be a little off point, but recently, I have been reading some of Richard Wagner’s writings, which have a nasty habit of veering off into the crudest and most vicious anti-Semitism, just as he seems to be in the middle of some interesting and thoughtful point or other about the relation between music and religion, drama and art. This, I suppose would go to support the point that was made above about a great intellect (not to mention what I consider as some of the most sublime music ever written) being no defense against racism and prejudice.
Indeed, some scholars believe the Wagner’s music was not written despite his anti-Semitism, but because of it, and that the music depends on Wagner’s intense anti-Semitic feeling for its full effect. Wagner also has a good deal to say about the Christian origins of anti-Semitism, which I am trying to make some sense out of. I don’t know if I will be able to.
Posted by: algasema | May 28th, 2008 at 6:54 pm | Report this commentWell Semite refers to both Arabs and Jews …however Anti Semitism only refers and applies to irrational hatred of Jews and over the centuries has taken many forms…Unless you are of the opinion that any reference to “Zionists” or disagreement with Israel’s government policies is antisemitism, (which I reject) you could argue that there is more irrational hatred of Arabs in the world today than of Jews…perhaps when we speak of anti-Semitism in the 21st century that is what it will come to mean…irrational hatred of Arabs.
Posted by: Lisa-Helene Lawson | May 28th, 2008 at 7:03 pm | Report this commentTwo comments in response to J.J.: Her first paragraph is decidedly unhelpful in terms of understanding anti-Semitism. To paraphrase Marc Antony, I thought we were here to bury anti-Semitism, not to praise it.
With respect to her second pargraph, my question is: Did her German boss also have a mustache? Perhaps an answer will be forthcoming when the occasion arises.
Posted by: algasema | May 28th, 2008 at 7:16 pm | Report this commentLisa-Helene, many years ago, an Egyptian friend referred to Jewish anti-Arab feeling as “An anti-Semitism within an Anti-Semitism”. An interesting comment.
Posted by: algasema | May 28th, 2008 at 7:29 pm | Report this commentLisa, “perhaps when we speak of anti-Semitism in the 21st century that is what it will come to mean…irrational hatred of Arabs.” So what do you think is going to happen to anti-Jewish prejudice? Changing the name won’t make it disappear.
And if the comments on this blog are anything to go by, there’s no chance of it disappearing anytime soon. I mean, “they’re so successful in business”; words fail me.
The Big Bad Wolf.
Posted by: AYC | May 28th, 2008 at 7:40 pm | Report this commentIs it all anti-Semitism, all the time to some perhaps because they have lost the
argument?
“Mr Brzezinski said ‘it’s not unique to the Jewish community – but there is a McCarthyite
tendency among some people in the Jewish community’…
“They operate not by arguing but by slandering, vilifying, demonising. They very promptly wheel out anti-Semitism. There is an element of paranoia in this inclination to view any serious attempt at a compromised peace as somehow directed against Israel.” (Telegraph, Wednesday)
Re AYC’s comments:
Posted by: agog | May 28th, 2008 at 8:51 pm | Report this commentBenign occupation, indeed! South African Archbishop Emeritus DesmondTutu, now in Gaza, seems not to agree. Are we really meant to believe this hasbara nonsense?
Lise, not sure David Kimche is someone you’d want to be quoting at length about what makes sense for Israeli security and foreign policy. His last job in this respect was sealing the deal with the Phalange immediately prior to the 1982 invasion of Lebanon. We all know how that brilliant idea ended and that’s kinda why it was his last job…. On the other hand he has still written the definitive book on the 1948 war - still unsurpassed 50 odd years after he wrote it. Called “Both sides of the Hill”. Avi Shlaim would build a career pretending that stuff that was in this book was “discovered” by him, was “new” and “overthrew Zionist myths”.
Also if “anti-semiticism” is such a silencer, how come virtually all the discussion on the ME inevitably comes round to “Arabs and muslims would all love us if we stopped unconditionally supporting Israel”. How come Said, Chomsky, Khalidi et al can rise to prominent positions in academia - (Chomsky admittedly did first-class work on linguistics)? Or books attacking Israel get pumped out year in/year out? Maybe you should take a look at what happens to academics who criticise Syria/Iran/Turkey/Islam in even the mildest tones to see what “brave” really means. A hint is they don’t get tenured positions in Ivy league universities and don’t get bestsellers published by premier publishing houses. They certainly do get imprisioned, sued for libel, death threats and actual death.
As for Obama, he is doing the smart thing and avoided each and every issue. As long as he manages to say nothing of substance, he can’t be attacked. That’s why his advisors are under attack and why he ditches them so quickly.
One final point, I haven’t read anywhere that anyone expects the “talks” Israel is having to go anywhere. It is simply Annapolis 2. And Israeli army Radio doesn’t confirm the swaps or talks, in fact it states the opposite: “That a deal WON’T be done in the coming days” and goes on to explicitly deny it.
http://glz.msn.co.il/newsArticle.aspx?newsid=21327
Posted by: Danny | May 29th, 2008 at 5:22 am | Report this commentDanny,
I have my own issues with Kimche. They go back to the 80’s and his treatment of someone I cared about deeply. But his take on AIPAC is correct and reflects the feelings of many in Israel who deal day in and day out on security.
AIPAC’s major conference is this weekend. Obama, McCain and Clinton… and Olmert, if he is not in jail, are speaking….I note Hagee was a keynote last year.
As far of the news reports of talks with Hezbollah,that I discussed in a previous report, I saw it on a HaAretz ticker tape report this morning…it hardly matters if it is accurate at the moment due to the political crisis in Jerusalem with Olmert’s government, little progress will be made until he is replaced.
In any event, there will be eventually negotiations with Hezbollah…they are part of the Lebanon government now and may run it some day…little is written about their successful coup, but again this was a watershed event for the Middle East and the significant changes that come will be related to this event….
There will hopefully soon a ceasefire agreement with Hamas…they will probably run not only Gaza but the West Bank some day…at best one can hope that like the IRgun has they move to the political-governmental arena they moderate…i.e., choose the political arena only to fight their battles…
The Israelis are waiting to long to release Marwan Barghouti…it is a big mistake. If Abbas for whatever reason is dislodged, the Israelis will be very sorry their is a vacuum in Palestinian leadership…It’s late, I am going to bed ..good night.
Posted by: Lisa-Helene Lawson | May 29th, 2008 at 7:10 am | Report this commentThe answers to my question of what may be the causes of anti-Semitism beyond the shallow clichés of contemporary thought-control are that: I am anti-Semitic, I am a racist, I blame the victim, I am inadequate, I am a pale Julius Streicher,and I am playing dumb.
Thanks for the insight.
The funny thing is that my questions posed in Haaretz would have elicited serious and thoughtful answers not just the predictable stale-bread invectives of the closed mind.
That should tell us all a lot.
Posted by: Paskalis | May 29th, 2008 at 7:11 am | Report this commentFair enough, Danny. Those accused of anti-Semitism generally need not fear being “imprisoned, sued for libel, death threats [or] actual death.” For this, I suppose, we should be grateful. (Norman Finkelstein might not agree.)
It does, though, seem to set the bar rather low. It calls to mind the well-worn hasbara defense of the Occupation by referring to how much worse the situation is in Darfur so why single out Israel?
Posted by: agog | May 29th, 2008 at 7:44 am | Report this commentThe reports of “progress in exchange talks” are regular ones put out by Hizbollah. Every single one is a lie but eventually one will be true. As for Olmert’s weakness, this doesn’t have an impact on prisoner exchanges as he can do this without going to parliament, in fact it makes it more likely. “Peace” with Syria on the other hand isn’t happening anytime soon.
As for Hamas, their main economic backer is rapidly going bankrupt. For all the comments about the US economy, it is in great shape compared to Iran. When the country becomes a net importer of oil in the next couple of years, see how popular sending money to “resistance” movements in Palestine, Iraq and Lebanon is. Then we’ll see how popular the “resistance” is. My guess is that 10 years from now, bar Iran getting a nuke people will stop caring about the Middle East and it will be like Africa where people can murder each other with impunity.
As for Israeli people “involved in security” - whatever that means - the few I know aren’t so concerned about AIPAC, apart from being a little bit embarassed about them. Rather they are more concern that the US ties Israeli hands in it’s conduct. One can see this in the stop/start character of every single one of Israel’s operations in the last decade.
As for Anti-Semiticism/Anti-Zionism, it is the irrational bit that has changed. In academia, bashing Israel is a no-lose situation. You’ll get noteriety - pace Finkelstein, Said etc - that your academic contribution doesn’t merit. Israel is unlikely to sue you, imprison you, make death threats, impose a boycott on your institution, bankrupt you or kill you. Criticise ANY other country in the ME - including the Palestinians - and that is nowhere near the case. Ditto in the media, you are unlikely to get banned from Israel, you certainly won’t get kidnapped and with one irrelevent exception, you won’t get shot. On the other hand it will make you more welcome in other places in the ME. So there is no irrationality at all. If you think somehow it is Israel “silences” criticism, then you read up on the ongoing case with Al-Dura and France 2. If you think somehow criticising Israel, “even” in the states is “brave”, look at Walt and Mearsheimer. Honestly hands up anyone who had heard of them before they started bashing israel and when they are crying themselves to sleep over the bad names they have been called they can comfort themselves with the fact a work that reads like some simply cut and paste from a “I hate Israel” google search has reaped them a bestseller and rich pickings from speaker appointments. Beats doing all that boring research and fact-checking
Posted by: Danny | May 29th, 2008 at 8:02 am | Report this commentThe whole discussion here boils down to three or four questions:
(a) Does a group of people whose ancestors were abused by another have the right to abuse a third group subsequently?
We all know the answer. There cannot be special pleading. History and logic are implacable about this.
(b) Does a minority in the US which appoints itself as the spokesman/agent
of the Israel have the right to denature the policy of the US
in the ME to the extend that it forces it (the US) to make enemies of one billion people? The answer is again no.
(c) Is antisemitism behind criticism of israeli actions? On logical grounds you have to examine what the charges are. In other words two wrongs never make a right.
In secular Europe antisemitism is passe. Let me give you an example. Take France:
Its political leadership contains Sarkozy (a sephardic jew from his mom).
The FO Kouchner is an asckenazy from his grandfather and Claude Lelouche is a sephardic jew from Tunis. The current policy of France is a total negation of the Gaullist even-handedness. The press: Le Figaro is ownned by Dassault (jew). Liberation by Rothschild. And LeMonde used to be overseen by Alain Minc (ex Russian jew).
The main public intellectuals these papers parade are extrememe zionists:
Alain Filkenkraut, Pascal Bruckner, Andre Glucksmann, Wiesel. etc.
I read the french press regularly. I have never come across a fundamental criticism of israeli practices. If any
of you read french you should read Alexander Adler of the Figaro.
The only two notable exceptions are Alain Gresch (writes in Le Monde Diplomatique and sustains a blog on the ME) who can be called a true scholar, and Edgar Morin a greek jew from Salonica.
Is there racism in France? Anwer a lot.
Who ‘receives’ it ? The north african
arabs of the Paris suburbs and elsewhere who compete for low skilled jobs with the french. (A whole party , the Front National is based on this). The problem the zionists have in france is that information is now globalized and the news flows cannot be controlled that well.
In general societies have problems with “the other”. They tend to homogenize. In this regard no acceptable answer has been given to Paskalis query. Those who tried to answer him have to do better. (Socio-historically better).
Posted by: Cassandra | May 29th, 2008 at 9:48 am | Report this commentCassandra, you are waffling and obfuscating.
We are not that stupid.
Posted by: RCS | May 29th, 2008 at 10:28 am | Report this commentRCS…You are mud slinging and evading. Try to have a rationalargument for a change.
Posted by: Pacifist | May 29th, 2008 at 11:11 am | Report this commentCalm down everybody….please. No point in personal abuse.
Posted by: Gideon Rachman | May 29th, 2008 at 11:22 am | Report this commentIf you find yourself tempted, go and have a latte.
Gideon… part of the problem is that too much coffee is drunk by the “citizens” of this blog which gives rise to agressive posts.
Have a cup of green tea everyone!
P
Posted by: Pacifist | May 29th, 2008 at 12:01 pm | Report this commentAgog, “defense of the Occupation by referring to how much worse the situation is in Darfur so why single out Israel?”. There are two points here, entirely pertinent to the argument. The first is that the victims in Sudan aren’t bombarding major population centres daily, aren’t perpetrating suicide bombings and aren’t guilty of mass incitement, including the brainwashing of children.
I have no problem people being critical of Israel and its policies, however what I do object to is a focus on Israel and “the occupation” to the exclusion of all else. This is where criticism of Israel crosses the line into anti-Semitism. Prime example: the Durban conference. It has been quite a surprise to see so many people focussed this year on Tibet instead of Israel - I guess that is the bad luck of the Chinese.
The second is that if you stop and think awhile, how much of the coverage focussed on Israel is actually relevant to the rest of the world? As has been pointed out earlier, Israel is a tiny country and by rights should receive a tiny percentage of coverage, even as it fights a long running war.
How many have died in Sudan over the past 3 or 4 years? How many in Angola over the past 30? How many are dying in Zimbabwe? China has just lost nearly 90,000 in an earthquake, Burma possible hundreds of thousands. Add up the column inches and see whether it is really justified.
But due to a confluence of factors including, but not limited, to the rise of Islamism focussing on regaining “lost lands” (including Spain, parts of France and the Balkans I might add), the geo-strategic importance of the Arab world, Israel’s friendship with the whipping boy of the anti-Imperialist left, and yes, the fact that Israel is the state of the Jews and as such has become the main target of those wishing to do down that race - including members of that race itself - Israel is continually pushed up the media agenda.
Even if you scroll through previous topics and posts on this blog, whatever GR originally wrote seems to be forgotten and the vast majority somehow make their way back to the culpability of the “Zionists” / the US.
Cassandra’s comment is a case in point, “We all know the answer. There cannot be special pleading. History and logic are implacable about this.”
A one sided take on a complex situation. But if we widen the view out a little, he is right, history and logic are implacable - a nation state has the right to defend itself from terrorism, attacks on its cities and the deliberate targeting of civilians. Which other country in the world would be so restrained? Any of the European countries taking the moral high ground? Russia? China? The US?
Paskalis: “The funny thing is that my questions posed in Haaretz would have elicited serious and thoughtful answers not just the predictable stale-bread invectives of the closed mind.” Would they? These aren’t exactly new questions and you’re not breaking any ground by posing them.
Do we blame the victim for the motives of the aggressor? Difficult to tell if you really are naïve, or malicious.
Posted by: AYC | May 29th, 2008 at 12:18 pm | Report this commentCassandra, you forgot to mention French Bernard Henri Levy (BHL as commonly called) who likes to present himself as the ultimate objective philosopher but went into a real personal vandetta against a mixed-raced comedian Dieudonne for daring to raise the points you made across and for criticising Ariel Sharon’s policy. Dieudonne was publicly insulted by most of the above people you mentionned, invited on radio and TV shows just to be blasted, was called anti-semitic, racist (he is half black), stupid, evil, hitler, idiotic etc….became personae non grata in the French media, demonstrations were organised everywhere he went, and was banned from performing his shows. He also had to deal with the humiliation of having one of the most popular TV host of the time Thierry Ardisson tell him in his face and in front of millions of viewers that unless he apologises for the comment be made about ARIEL SHARON (not jews) he would not be invited in his show anymore. Fortunately Dieudonne refused to submit to such BS***. For many of us, the way he was treated was a complete eye opener as to what you describe as “total negation of the even-handedness”. I remember watching the initial show where he made the comments and at the time did not even think this might give rise to controversy. Many of us were totally shocked by the whole story, and it is only since then that I started paying more attention to the total absence of debate on issues concerning Israel in France. It is a huge pity, but fortunately they were not able to silence Dieudonne, on the contrary he now has a very loyal following, but the problem mentionned in this article is not restrained to the US.
Posted by: Susie | May 29th, 2008 at 12:18 pm | Report this commentDear RCS / AYC / Danny / Felix et al.
Do you accept that there is a tremendous streak of racism and feelings of racial superiority amongst the Jews?
Do you acknowledge that the contempt shown for the Palestinians and their plight and the constant demonisation of those wretched people is chiefly informed by racism?
How about the references to non-Jews in the Old Testament, the Talmud and in general Jewish slang. (e.g. The Yiddish word for a non-Jewish woman is “Shiksa” which “is derived from the Hebrew term sheketz, which means “abomination,” “impure,” or “object of loathing”, depending on the translator” (from Wikipedia).
Or are you saying that the Jews are exclusively the victims and everyone else has transgressed against them unprovoked and this entitles anybody Jewish to do their worst (e.g. steal land, wreak collective punishment on civilian populations, proliferate WMD’s, assassinate opponents world-wide, have Jew-only roads and carpet bomb neighbouring countries with cluster bombs?)
Thanks.
P ( sipping Turkish coffee!)
Posted by: Pacifist | May 29th, 2008 at 12:57 pm | Report this commentPaskalis claims he did not receive any serious answers: “The answers to my question of what may be the causes of anti-Semitism beyond the shallow clichés of contemporary thought-control are that: I am anti-Semitic, I am a racist, I blame the victim, I am inadequate, I am a pale Julius Streicher,and I am playing dumb.”
I answered him once: “Historically anti-Semitism has not been such a world embracing phenomemon. Anti-Semitism originated and evolved in the Christian world (the fact that in modern times, for reasons of modern political conflict in the ME, it has been hijacked by many Islamist groups, does not negate this assertion). Anti-semitism has always been coupled with Christianity. It is said that those we fear/loath the most are those which are most similar to us. Thus, Communists hated Democratic Socialists more than any capitalist. In the same way, the Christian church always had a tortured relationship with Judaism and the Jews.”
For Paskalis’ benefit I reiterated my argument a second time: “Anti-Semitism didn’t exist before the advent of Christianity. If the Romans were prejudiced towards the Jews, that can be easily understood in the context of the repeated insurgencies in Palestine. Anyway, they soon forgot of their prejudice as they became obsessed with Christians. Therefore, pre-Christian “anti-Semitism” is not anti-Semitism in the way that word is used today — a visceral irrational hatred directed specifically against Jews. Anti-semitism is a Christian-derived phenomenon, which in modern times has dressed itself in a secular guise, and has lately been transported to Muslim lands.
Historically, Islam was relatively tolerant towards “the People of the Book”, a term referring to both Christians as well as Jews. So your racist suggestion that anti-Semitism has something to do with the “structure of the Jewish communities” is disproved.”
Paskalis, you could say you disagree with my answers — but you cannot claim your questions were evaded!
Posted by: RCS | May 29th, 2008 at 1:16 pm | Report this commentDear P,
“Do you accept that there is a tremendous streak of racism and feelings of racial superiority amongst the Jews?”
No I do not. How could you say that when many leading left-wing thinkers are Jews? I could add that that in itself is a racist comment.
“Do you acknowledge that the contempt shown for the Palestinians and their plight and the constant demonisation of those wretched people is chiefly informed by racism?”
Contempt shown where? In the Israeli media? Demonisation? I have not encoutered any. Seriously. Perhaps you could inform me.
As for the Old Testament, it is a sacred text for Christians as well as — Muslims (AFIK). What are you saying? That the Bible is racist? What about the Qur’an and non-believers? What kind of an argument is that?
“Or are you saying that the Jews are exclusively the victims and everyone else has transgressed against them unprovoked and this entitles anybody Jewish to do their worst…”
No I am not.
Enjoy your cofee.
Posted by: RCS | May 29th, 2008 at 1:39 pm | Report this commentP, Do i accept there are Jewish racists - yes I do. Do I accept all jews are racists, no. Do I accept there is a higher level or more racism from Jews, no. Do I believe there is any correlation between racism and being Jewish, no. Do I think that Jews have alot to be proud of, yes. Do I think they should somehow not overacheive as to not be accused of “acting with superiority”, no I don’t. I don’t want to put words in your mouth, but I assume given you are one of the more informed commentators that you are not in anyway suggesting Jews should “know their place”… I say this as someone who is technically Shia or Christian - whoever you wish to pick, it is all nonsense to me.
“Do you acknowledge that the contempt shown for the Palestinians and their plight and the constant demonisation of those wretched people is chiefly informed by racism?” Absolutely not. It is informed by decades of fighting, decades where the chief interaction is conflict. Even then I do not recognise that Palestinians are “constantly demonised” by anyone except a minute fringe of Israeli society. I would say that Israelis I have met bend over backwards to be fair to a people who have tried to kill as many of them as possible. You must not read any Israeli news, any Israeli commentary or met any Israelis. The one time I went to Israel for a friends wedding, I got a hard time at the airport - with a passport that says born in Basra, early years in Iran and multiple stamps to Iraq, Iran, Syria and Lebanon - oh and did I mention a Shia mother - but I have got just as bad in the US.
Are jews “exclusively” the victims? What media are you watching? How many FT editorials you read? The Burma cyclone just killed more people than have been killed in the entire Arab-Israeli conflict, you see anyone flying planes into buildings to “protest US unconditional support”?
Posted by: Danny | May 29th, 2008 at 1:58 pm | Report this commentThe great Marx, Groucho, once said in a film, “Who you gonna believe, me or your own eyes?” Too many people here are trying to pull the whole cloth over ours.
Posted by: Paskalis | May 29th, 2008 at 2:10 pm | Report this commentPaskalis, at least we’re clear where you come from. What I don’t understand is why you read a Jewish columnist?
Posted by: AYC | May 29th, 2008 at 2:25 pm | Report this commentAYC, is it that obvious that I come from Cleveland?
Posted by: Paskalis | May 29th, 2008 at 3:05 pm | Report this commentI’m distressed that I find myself reading a Jewish columnist although I should have suspected something when I found Rachman listed under “Jews” in the Financial Times masthead.
Pacifist: “I think it is about time that Jews held up a mirror to their souls and examined their own actions”. Germany is a good place to reflect on those words. Go see the holocaust memorial in Berlin and see if you’re able to say the same afterwards.
Posted by: AYC | May 29th, 2008 at 3:23 pm | Report this commentEnough already.
Posted by: Gideon Rachman | May 29th, 2008 at 3:26 pm | Report this commentWith that hilarious joke from Paskalis, I hereby declare this thread closed.
.