Israel/Palestine
Related: About this forumA Reminder That Anti-Semitism Has no Place in Debates Over Israel
Yesterday, Peter Beinart's pluralistic blog, Open Zion, published a post by Alex Kane, a staff writer for a website called Mondoweiss. It's impossible to peer into the hearts and minds of the people who edit the site, but Mondoweiss often gives the appearance of an anti-Semitic enterprise. Site founder and editor Phil Weiss, a former writer for the American Conservative when Pat Buchanan was editor, wrote this past May, "I can justly be accused of being a conspiracy theorist because I believe in the Israel lobby theory ... certainly my theory has an explanation of the rise and influence of the neocons. They don't have a class interest but an ideological-religious one."
An April 2011 article on the site strongly implied that Mossad agents were involved in the murder of Italian activist Vittorio Arrigonni, an assertion for which there's no factual evidence. In 2011, contributor Max Ajl argued against "left-wing" condemnation of the Itamar massacre, in which attackers killed five members of a settler family, including a three-month old baby. In 2009, Jack Ross, who has contributed to the white nationalist, Holocaust-denying journal The Barnes Review, argued on Mondoweiss that "it was not the appeasement, but the internationalist hubris and bellicosity of Chamberlain which started World War II." In other words, lay off the Nazis.
<snip>
Philip Weiss has found evidence of Jewish influence and Jewish perfidy in everything from NPR to the names of the buildings at Harvard University to an innocuous statement by Rabbi Shmuley Boteach. Weiss has argued that the "Jewish presence in the Establishment" imposes its own single-minded, communalistic interests upon the whole of American and British society. "Don't you see," he wrote in a post also suggesting "Zionists" were to blame for the outbreak of the Iraq war, "the vociferousness and effectiveness of the Israel lobby make this conflict Our Conflict!" Ironically, Weiss also believes that Zionism entails Jewish self-hatred.
<snip>
Publishing anti-Semites, or people who work for websites that traffic in anti-Semitic innuendo or conspiracy theories, empowers ideas aimed at obscuring the humanity of one side of an already-violent conflict. Kane's inclusion actually undermines Open Zion's confidence that honest intellectual engagement can contribute to the larger cause of understanding and peace. Instead, it reflects a depressing cynicism about the state of public discourse on the Middle East--a cynicism that believers in peace, and believers in the triumph of ideas over paranoia and bigotry, have both a moral and intellectual duty to reject.
<snip>
http://www.theatlantic.com/international/archive/2012/07/a-reminder-that-anti-semitism-has-no-place-in-debates-over-israel/259830/
= new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight:
NoneDon't highlight anything
5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
shira
(30,109 posts)Salon is proud to feature content from Mondoweiss, a news website devoted to covering American foreign policy in the Middle East, and the evolving debate over the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. Mondoweiss features a diverse set of writers offering on the ground reports from Israel/Palestine, personal reflections on the intersection of politics and culture, as well as media criticism, political analysis, and occasionally even some humor.
http://www.salon.com/2012/07/16/the_bias_in_israeli_courts_salpart/
shira
(30,109 posts)The point of Mondoweiss is to get rid of Israel. The site is of course an avid supporter of BDS. While occasional lip-service is given to the two-state solution as a way to resolve the conflict between Israel and the Palestinians, any regular reader will understand this is not something to strive for, as it won't resolve the basic injustice of Israel's existence. Moreover, the conceit of the blog is that it is actively promoting its goal, by spreading the truth about Israel, and slowly chipping away at the stranglehold the Zionists have on the media and public discourse. Weiss writes regularly with considerable excitement about how the public discourse is changing; he's always on the outlook for new converts to his positions or anything near them, and to read him you'd think there's a sea-change underway so that soon Israel will lose its support in America, and soon thereafter, shorn of its only ally, it will crumble away. The Israelis, aware of the precariousness of their enterprise, are eternally bolstering their control of the discourse, because without it they're lost; but they're losing it anyway because the only decent way to understand the Middle East is to hate Israel and this decency is already proving itself more powerful than the Zionist tricks to keep it at bay.
<snip>
Being against the existence of Israel isn't particularly exceptional. One of the interesting things about Mondoweiss is the tremendous amount of work they invest in their animosity. I happen to think the Saudi regime is ghastly, but I'd never spend hours every day digging up dirt on it. The Mondoweiss people do that, first by avidly seeking any remotely negative story about Israel, then by seeking the ones which aren't true, then by damning anyone who casts doubt with terms such as hasbarists, Ziobots (I assume these are part Zionists and part robots), and of course genocidists. In order to collect all that dirt they've got to pass by the occasional positive story too, but these never get linked to or even alluded to unless to demonstrate how yet another journalist has succumbed to the threat of Zionist censorship. The result is a depiction of reality which has at best a glancing relationship with the real world, but these folks aren't interested in the real world. In their world, Zionists are easily the worst group of humans, they purportedly hate all Palestinians, they enforce the most cruel policies possibly on them, they steal from-, degrade and kill Palestinians, on a daily basis.
You read Mondoweiss regularly and the force of hatred towards Zionists becomes overpowering: no normal decent person could have anything but the deepest contempt for such a gang of deceitful violent criminals. As a commentor named "American" recently wrote: The thing about the zionist is they attack even those who help them. They turned on England, calling it “worse than Hitler’ because England tried to uphold the immigration quotas agreed to. They demonize the UN that created their state for them.
Interestingly, the Mondoweiss community not only has no interest in the lives of real Israelis, it also has no interest in the lives of real Palestinians. Their point is to hate Israel and damn it, no matter what; the possibility that there are Palestinians who live alongside Israelis, interact with them, and even could imagine living with them in peace, is a thought never contemplated. I have Palestinian staff members, colleagues and friends; none of them could remotely fit into the Mondoweiss world. The methodology also has the odd result that according to Mondoweiss, Israelis and Palestinians are all boring cardboard figures, with none of the complexities, complications, shades of grey, frustrations and successes of real people. The very parts of the human story which make it worth following are all dropped, to be replaced by detestation (towards Israelis) and patronizing pity (towards Palestinians).
<snip>
Summary: There may be tens of thousands of loyal Mondoweiss readers - an unimportant demographic, but an interesting sociological and historical group. There is no possibility for discourse between them and us, only invective from their side, and head-shaking from ours. Yet they fit comfortably into ancient traditions of Jew-hatred, and thus their potential significance shouldn't be shrugged off. It's important to keep in mind that the free and pluralistic society of the West also harbors such ugly forms of thought.
http://yaacovlozowick.blogspot.com/2012/04/mondoweiss-vipers-nest-of-antisemites.html
kayecy
(1,417 posts)So what exactly is upsetting you in the article Shira?........That it claims the Jewish lobby is more influential than the Arab lobby?.......
That it claims the US attack on Iraq was supported by the neo-cons?
shira
(30,109 posts)1. The Arab OIL Lobby is far stronger and more influential than the Israel Lobby (not Jewish as most of its strength comes from christians).
2. The antisemitic claim is that Jewish neo-cons got the USA to attack Iraq.
These same tropes existed before WW2 and the Holocaust. Jews apparently didn't have enough power and influence back then to save 1/3 of their own population. Of course, they probably influenced the Nazis to kill millions of Jews in order to have a reason to steal Palestine from the poor indigenous non-Jews of that region. 
kayecy
(1,417 posts)1. The Arab OIL Lobby is far stronger and more influential than the Israel Lobby
You have some evidence for that claim?.......AIPAC itself claims it is the most influential lobby in the USA!
2. The antisemitic claim is that Jewish neo-cons got the USA to attack Iraq
Again, why do you think that?....Me, I am open-minded......After Weizmann influenced the British Government and Neuman's American Palestine Comittee influenced Truman, anything is possible don't you think?....Or have you some evidence that the Iraq war was not propmoted by Israel supporters?
.
Mosby
(16,406 posts)The Israeli government strongly suggested to the Bush admin that they NOT invade Iraq, you can read about this in the first ME wikileak dump.
kayecy
(1,417 posts)How do you explain the following then?
Benjamin Netanyahu visited Washington, DC in April 2002 and spoke in the U.S. Senate, telling his audience "the urgent need to topple Saddam is paramount," and that the campaign "deserves the unconditional support of all sane governments."
In May, foreign minister Shimon Peres said on CNN that "Saddam Hussein is as dangerous as bin Laden," and that the United States "cannot sit and wait."
In July, former Prime Minister Ehud Barak wrote an op-ed in the Washington Post recommending that the Bush administration "should, first of all, focus on Iraq and the removal of Saddam Hussein."
holdencaufield
(2,927 posts)... AARP, or the NRA, or the PRMA, or the combined Energy Lobby might take umbrage at your suggestion that little Israel might have more influence than they.
After all, they didn't outspend AIPAC by billions of dollars just to take a back seat to a bunch of kibbutzniks in kova tembel.
kayecy
(1,417 posts)holdencaufield
(2,927 posts)How much political influence is too much for Jewish Americans?
Response to holdencaufield (Reply #28)
Post removed
King_David
(14,851 posts)Is probably off the scales compared to the 2%.
I see no problem with it.
holdencaufield
(2,927 posts)Jews... in our government? What next -- teaching our kids in school?!
Just a question... how do you know they're Jewish? Is it by their names or did they steal your lunch money?
kayecy
(1,417 posts)Last edited Thu Jul 19, 2012, 03:34 AM - Edit history (1)
It is not whether they are Jewish .........It is whether they are ultra-Zionist and whether they support Israel right or wrong and have influence on US policy.
The list I produced is a clear indication of how much influence ultra-Zionists have in the US.....Or do you, like Shira think AIPAC has less influence than the pro-Arab lobby?
holdencaufield
(2,927 posts)You clearly wrote:
"about 2% of the US population is Jewish, about 8% of Congress is Jewish.. under the Bush presidency we had the following high positions filled by Jews..."
Note, you didn't say Ultra-Zionists, Neo-cons, Pro-Israelis, or Lithuanian Acrobats... you said "Jews", Sir
Look, I don't mind what you believe about Jews or how you feel about us -- just have the GUTS to say it loud and proud and don't try to back-pedal.
kayecy
(1,417 posts)
Shaktimaan
(5,397 posts)It's not whether they are Jewish, huh? Then why did you write:
Well, about 2% of the US population is Jewish, about 8% of Congress is Jewish.
Under the Bush presidency we had the following high positions filled by Jews:
Why the percentages? Why the mention of what positions were filled specifically by Jews, with nothing said about what positions were filled by "ultra-Zionists?" Out of that list, many of those people are not even Jewish anyway. Many, (most), are not "ultra-Zionists" either, they just happen to be Jews. Some of the influential positions are "White House's Special Liaison to the Jewish Community" and "Assistant Secretary of Treasury for Tax Policy." So any Jew employed by the government is an example of Zionist influence to you?
The list I produced is a clear indication of how much influence ultra-Zionists have in the US
Really? How so? Because more than 2% of these jobs are filled by Jews? Are the Zionists using nepotism to get their family members government jobs? Because most of these have nothing to do with foreign policy, or if they do, nothing to do with Israel. Some are just about being Jewish... why would an Arab have those jobs?
Which ones out of all these people support Israel right-or-wrong anyway?
shira
(30,109 posts)It appears you just C&P'd their names as all the names you gave are in the exact order as the list on Rense.
holdencaufield
(2,927 posts)... for these people to expose themselves. It sickens my heart that they are migrating from the more insane websites and beginning to associate with Democrats.
I wonder what could be giving them the idea that they have ideological compatriots within the ranks of our party?
shira
(30,109 posts)I've been repeating myself here time after time....
I cannot distinguish between the far, far right and the hard left when it comes to Israel and Jews. Things haven't changed much since the WW2 era as the Stalinist Left = Fascist Right. The only difference is the Stalinist Left is a bit more clever masking their hate.
azurnoir
(45,850 posts)kayecy
(1,417 posts)You made two claims to show that Mondoweiss were anti-semitic.
No, but it doesn't matter......What matters is your slanderous accusations.
1. The Arab OIL Lobby is far stronger and more influential than the Israel Lobby (not Jewish as most of its strength comes from christians).
2. The antisemitic claim is that Jewish neo-cons got the USA to attack Iraq.
So far you have failed to produce support for either claim.
I have shown you that the number of Ultra-Zionist pro-Israelis in the Bush administartion was enormous......I have challenged you to produce a similar list of pro-Arab, anti-Zionists with similar influence.
If you can't produce such names, then admit your claims and the article you posted were just another example of the anti-semitic slander used by pro-Israelis to dengrate anti-Zionists.
.
holdencaufield
(2,927 posts)... its tune when it accidentally displays its agenda before the wrong crowd.
Here is what it wrote above...
"Under the Bush presidency we had the following high positions filled by Jews:"
Notice it didn't say, Neo-cons, ultra-zionists (whatever that is), or Pro-Israelis -- it said "Jews"
It also wrote: "about 2% of the US population is Jewish, about 8% of Congress is Jewish."
Clearly it is concerned about too many "Jews" (not neocons, Zionists or pro-Israelis) in the US government.
It probably forgot that before this particular audience, it has to rephrase the rhetoric to be anti-Zionist instead of anti-Jewish. But, it needn't have bothered. I for one prefer the honesty.
kayecy
(1,417 posts)How much political influence is too much for Jewish Americans?
Since you referred to Jews, I replied using the same language...Many Jews and most Israelis are Zionists.......Most Americans will refer to AIPAC as the Jewish Lobby.....Does that make most Americans anti-semitic?
If you look back at my posts I almost never use the word Jewish because it is not synonymous with Zionism........Many Jews, fortunately, are anti-Zionists.........You, though, appear to have no compunction about using racist slurs.
It probably forgot that before this particular audience, it has to rephrase the rhetoric to be anti-Zionist instead of anti-Jewish. But, it needn't have bothered. I for one prefer the honesty.
What you mean is you prefer slander.......You know you cannot accuse me or Mondoweiss of anti-semitism so you hide behind statements such as this....Shame on you!
.
.
holdencaufield
(2,927 posts)It doesn't matter where you got your list ... if you got it from Rense.com, Stormfront or the Tel Aviv phone book.
You're making list of Jews!
Jews that YOU consider dangerous
Let that sink in for a minute -- you are making list of Jews who you consider dangerous.
Are you legitimately unaware of what kind of people do that?
shira
(30,109 posts)Look below in post #55 where I gave 3 examples of it.
Is that anti-semitic in your view?
shira
(30,109 posts)As to Mondoweiss and the Oil Lobby....
1. The Oil Lobby is powerful on an International scale. I never claimed they have a lobby within America that is stronger than AIPAC.
2. Anti-semites still claim, despite evidence Israel warned against attacking Iraq, that Jews were behind the US invasion in 2003. This was the claim of Mearsheimer/Walt in their book, before they backed out of it later (destroying their credibility in the process).
Your list of ultra-zionists includes Henry Kissinger, who cannot possibly be described as such.
Now as to Mondoweiss, do you think their Jew baiting Nazi comparisons are anti-semitic, holocaust inverting slurs? Yes or No?
King_David
(14,851 posts)Scootaloo
(25,699 posts)Catering to AIPAC is good for throwing red meat to the Arab-haters and islamophobes in America during campaign season, but yeah... it really is AARP that gives politicians the chills.
You do not fuck with AARP.
shira
(30,109 posts)kayecy
(1,417 posts)AIPAC has nothing on the Oil Lobby...
After his May 1943 meeting with Saud. President Roosevelt backtracked on his support for a Jewish homeland in the Holy Land, and showed how beguiled he was by Saud telling a joint session of Congress on 1 March 1945 that
Is that the best you can do Shira?........A few quotes from a clearly pro-Israeli author?.....Get real...You say that AIPAC has nothing on the the oil lobby?
Neglecting the seminal work by Meirshima & Walt who I am sure, although Jewish themselves, you will consider biased, just Google for "AIPAC Influence on Foreign Affairs" and you get:
How Israel Lobby Took Control Of US Foreign Policy - by Jeff Gates
Norman Finkelstein and James Petras debate AIPAC's Influence on US Foreign Policy
AIPAC Dictates US Foreign Policy In The Middle East By Influencing Congress - Joe Abodeely
AIPAC, the Religious Right, and American Foreign Policy - Rodrigue Tremblay
AIPAC's Unrivaled Influence — MJ Rosenberg
And this one I really like:
Mr. Obama: Tell AIPAC You're The President - Araf Asef
Just google for "Arab influence on foreign affairs" and see what you get!
Now, can you provide some authoritive reference which supports this silly belief of yours?.......If not I suggest you widen you reading to get a less biased perspective on the Jewish lobby.
shira
(30,109 posts)Last edited Wed Jul 18, 2012, 09:08 AM - Edit history (1)
...who are not Jewish, as you falsely claim. But you're asking me whether Bard is the best I've got?
You must have missed this in the review cited for you:
That's real power; to dominate the UN, keep Israel out of just about every UN committee in order to focus on Israel and keep any pressure off themselves.
It's so real that nations like Saudi Arabia and Syria continue to make a mockery of the Human Rights Council by being on it in these "enlightened, progressive" days. And folks like yourself are silent about it.
But if that's not enough for you, consider 911 and Saudi Arabia's involvement (nearly all terrorists came from Saudi Arabia). The US didn't invade Saudi Arabia. The US invaded one of Saudi Arabia's greatest threats in that region (Iraq) that had nothing to do with 911 as the Saudis did.
That's unbelievably real power.
kayecy
(1,417 posts)That's real power; to dominate the UN, keep Israel out of just about every UN committee in order to focus on Israel and keep any pressure off themselves.
Wrong again Shira....Who cares about the UN?...Certainly not Israel, only the US has influence on Israel, that is where the real power lies.
Take the Bush presidency. How many Arabs were in senior positions in the White House?
Compare the influence of the Arabs in the White House with the following pro-Israel Jews:
Richard Perle
Paul Wolfowitz
Douglas Feith
Edward Luttwak
Henry Kissinger
Dov Zakheim
Kenneth Adelman
I. Lewis Libby
Robert Satloff
Elliott Abrams
Marc Grossman
Richard Haass
Robert Zoellick
Ari Fleischer
James Schlesinger
David Frum
Joshua Bolten
John Bolton
David Wurmser
Eliot Cohen
Mel Sembler
Michael Chertoff
Steve Goldsmith
Adam Goldman
Joseph Gildenhorn
Christopher Gersten
Mark Weinberger
Samuel Bodman
Bonnie Cohen
Ruth Davis
Then there were the ambassodors:
Daniel Kurtzer - Ambassador to Israel.
Cliff Sobel - Ambassador to the Netherlands.
Stuart Bernstein - Ambassador to Denmark.
Nancy Brinker - Ambassador to Hungary
Frank Lavin - Ambassador to Singapore.
Ron Weiser - Ambassador to Slovakia.
Mel Sembler - Ambassador to Italy.
Martin Silverstein - Ambassador to Uruguay
I challenge you to give me a similar list of pro-Arab staffers!
holdencaufield
(2,927 posts)... to deduce someone's political inclinations from their surnames? I'm amazed. Have you offered the FBI the use of your incredible gift?
shira
(30,109 posts)"The JEWS who Run Bush and the USA"
http://www.biblebelievers.org.au/bushlist.htm
Same list, exact same order.
Shaktimaan
(5,397 posts)Why would the Oil lobby be populated by Arabs? Why would the immense strength of that lobby result in the high level placement of Arabs within the US government?
The Arab states wield a tremendous amount of INTERNATIONAL power by virtue of the fact that they own most of the oil. But it is American companies that go in and build the infrastructure to pump it, transport it and sell it. It is American (and European) states and companies that purchase the oil from Arab states, refine it and then sell it to their own populations. The Arabs make plenty of money on this deal, make no mistake. But the MAJORITY of the people involved in this business are not of any specific ethnicity (controlling for the fact that white anglo-saxons dominate it as they dominate ALL industries.)
To argue that OPEC has no influence over US policies because there are not any Arab staffers in the white house is just... there is no word for how deeply one must not understand the world in order for someone to have faith in that belief. Do you remember when Iraq took over Kuwait back in 1990 or so? OK, now normally when a large, powerful state like Iraq decides to swallow a tiny, pinprick of a useless place like Kuwait, do you know what the world does? They do nothing, because in all likelihood no one even noticed. In the event they did notice, their reaction was not one of "caring." This is because it had zero affect on their own lives. But when Kuwait was invaded... the whole world went totally fucking ape shit! Why is that, do you think? Why was the WHOLE WESTERN WORLD willing to go to WAR just to free some backwards, tiny, podunk place where they still practice racism and sexism as though it was the dark ages? Why risk American lives to free A MONARCHY??!!
And to your point... HOW do you think this happened despite the fact that there were NO Arab staffers in the White House to MAKE it happen with their "influence?" One of the results of that war was that Israel got bombed every day. They were worried about chemical attacks, every citizen was issued a gas mask. Why didn't some of those super-influential Israeli staffers try and keep this from occurring?
Because the ethnicity of staffers has exactly fuck-all to do with how and why the US does anything whatsoever. What did the US do when Iraq attacked Iran? Sold 'em weapons! What about the genocide in Kosovo, what did we do then to protect those white people? (The SAME ethnicity as almost ALL white house staffers!!!) We invaded, eventually... after a long, long time.
BTW, your list is laughably inaccurate. Do you really consider Kissinger to have been a powerful Bush-era WH staffer? Cripes, even when he was working, he wasn't especially pro-Israel. He advised Nixon to abstain from helping Israel during the 1973 Yom Kippur War, going as far as to NOT INFORM him about what had happened there when the Arabs invaded! He is quoted as saying that even if the Russians put all their Jews in gas chambers that it wasn't a US concern. And John Bolten isn't even Jewish! And you listed ambassadors... since when do they have ANY influence on policy whatsoever?
LeftishBrit
(41,219 posts)Especially inaccurate ones: John Bolton is certainly not Jewish!
I have seen some of the comments downthread, and I have no idea whether this originated on Rense or not. The list seems to be all over the Internet (sometimes represented as a list of 'dual citizens' which it most certainly is not) - but not in any respectable site that I've ever seen. Let's leave material from nasty conspiracy-sites and Christian-Right sites off DU.
I am not accusing you of deliberately quoting such sites, just of a total failure to check whether your information comes from a respectable source or not.
King_David
(14,851 posts)A poster had his PPR because of quoting from a questionable and bigoted site.
Any idea how it is decided which offense warrants which kind of drastic actions?
http://www.democraticunderground.com/113414558
azurnoir
(45,850 posts)but if the Arab Oil Lobby has such undo influence why was Israel promised 30+ billion dollars while America was under the auspices of 2 oil men Cheney and Bush?
and I have not read that is was specifically Jewish neocons that pushed for Iraq war after all Bush who lied to the world about Iraq's involvement in 9/11 to get approval for the war is not Jewish
shira
(30,109 posts)Here's part of the book online...
http://www.amazon.com/Arab-Lobby-Invisible-Undermines-Interests/dp/0061725978
Here's a long review that gives examples of the Oil Lobby's influence...
http://www.amazon.com/review/R1BNR65IXZBYLK/ref=cm_cr_dp_title?ie=UTF8&ASIN=0061725978&nodeID=283155&store=books
azurnoir
(45,850 posts)The Arab Lobby: The Invisible Alliance That Undermines America’s Interests in the Middle East'
Buzz Rating: Hum.
http://www.thedailybeast.com/newsweek/blogs/we-read-it/2010/09/03/the-arab-lobby-the-invisible-alliance-that-undermines-america-s-interests-in-the-middle-east.html
but for one who is fast and loose with the accusation that people here see Zionist Conspiracies, it seems to be you that sees Arab ones everywhere perhaps your accusations are more projections
azurnoir
(45,850 posts)and shows a certain mind set comparing the US to Nazi Germany of the 1930's
thanks any more like that?
Scootaloo
(25,699 posts)You seem to have absolutely no problem at all using those exact same stereotypes against Arabs. Apparently the "vast Jewish conspiracy" is antisemitic, but the exact same rhetoric decrying the "vast Arab conspiracy" is something you throw your full support behind.
Ironic, but not particularly surprising, I guess.
shira
(30,109 posts)Scootaloo
(25,699 posts)The review you are pimping - indeed the book you are pimping - is not about "the oil lobby." It's about the "Arab lobby.". It's the fucking title of the book. In my excerpts, I have done you the courtesy of highlighting both the focus on Arabs, and the emotive terms that mirror the exact same accusations that have been levied against Jews for ages now.
The Arabs are corrupting our children, the Arabs are infiltrating our institutions, the Arabs are brainwashing us, the Arabs are a malign, poisonous force, the Arabs control the media, the Arabs control US foreign policy, the Arabs are undermining American values...
Are you seeing any similarities here, Shira? Any bells ringing in your head? No? I didn't think so; let's try this:
The Jews are corrupting our children, the Jews are infiltrating our institutions, the Jews are brainwashing us, the Jews are a malign, poisonous force, the Jews control the media, the Jews control US foreign policy, the Jews are undermining American values...
How about now? Coming in any clearer?
shira
(30,109 posts)Legit criticism is fair.
What made Walt/Mearsheimer's book bigoted was its outrageous lies, hyperbole, and whacky conspiracy theory (straight out of the history books). Had they stuck to facts and primary sources, not innuendo, hearsay, secondary or third party sources; had they not used time-worn antisemitic tropes, it would have been perceived much differently by the pro-Israel community. It turns out that last year, Walt/Mearsheimer tipped their hand when they endorsed Gilad Atzmon's latest antisemitic (holocaust denying/minimizing, Elders of Zion) trashy book. It's easy to see how bigoted Atzmon is. He's very obvious and proud of it. Walt/Mearsheimer were "Atzmon-lite" in their book and that's why their bigotry was a bit tougher to detect. Of course, the Israel/Jew haters loved it.
The 'Arab Lobby' cannot be compared to that amateurish, rightwing conspiracy trash.
Scootaloo
(25,699 posts)Here you are, defending a source that is saying that Arabs are a malign, poisonous force in America, corrupting our children and secretly pulling all the strings of our government though their immense wealth. All that it's lacking is references to using the blood of Christian babies to make falafel.
shira
(30,109 posts)I'm not defending any claim that Arabs are this, that, or whatever.
Are mideast oil baron dictators and tyrants above criticism in your view? Because if not, how would you describe them in order to form some critique?
The bigotry is all yours, sweetie, as you're the one thinking all Arab civilians are one with their oppressive, tyrannical leadership. That's why you pulling the bigotry card. Funny that, as you're clueless WRT what constitutes clear anti-semitism.
bemildred
(90,061 posts)Hill & Wang Publishes Harvey Pekar’s New Graphic Work on Israel
by Matt White
Much like the deceased rapper Tupac Shakur, the late autobiographical comics writer Harvey Pekar continues to deliver hits years after his death. This month Hill & Wang’s graphic nonfiction line, Novel Graphics, published Pekar’s latest posthumuous work, Not the Israel My Parents Promised Me, a historical profile and memoir that confronts the modern legacy of the Jewish state and the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. While the book, Illustrated by JT Waldman, approaches this sensitive issue from an impartial and historical perspective, it also remains unpretentiously and undeniably by Pekar and is interspersed with personal anecdotes and subtle human touches that give the book multiple layers of meaning.
Following the release of Pekar’s Students for a Democratic Society: A Graphic History in 2008, he approached former Hill & Wang publisher Thomas LeBien, founder of H&W’s Novel Graphics line of nonfiction comics, about writing a history of the Middle East. The book was planned as a way that Pekar could wrap his mind around the complex situation in the Middle East and settle, as LeBien described it, “a personal wrestling match" Pekar had been waging with himself over the years about the state of Israel. But Pekar was struggling to fit four-thousand years of history together with an increasingly prominent section on Israel, LeBien said, which included both the nation’s history as well as Pekar’s personal connection to it through his Zionist parents. At that point LeBien suggested Pekar switch the focus of the book to Israel and his religious upbringing, something more manageable for Pekar that also played to his strengths as a memoirist.
Along the path to publication, Not the Israel My Parents Promised Me experienced a number of changes, most notably Pekar’s death in July 2010. Up until that point Pekar had finished the script and approved pencils and some early ink work, providing Waldman with the necessary direction to finish the remainder of the book. Pekar’s wife, comics writer and editor Joyce Brabner, has also included a poignant epilogue to the book, a vignette about arranging Harvey’s funeral. And the book also lost LeBien, who left FSG/Hill & Wang for a new job at S&S, replaced by a new editor Amanda Moon who now directs the Novel Graphics imprint.
Moon worked closely with Waldman and the production team on the final stages of the book, using Pekar’s script as a guide and doing their best to honor his intended message. Even the title changed over the course of writing the book, going from “How Israel Failed Me” to its now less grim final title, after Waldman voiced his personal reservations about the original title.
http://www.publishersweekly.com/pw/by-topic/book-news/comics/article/52890-hill--wang-publishes-harvey-pekar--s-new-graphic-work-on-israel.html
azurnoir
(45,850 posts)and to think they teach this (Maus) in schools these days 
bemildred
(90,061 posts)It's like being Sisyphus sweeping out the Augean Stables I tell ya.
azurnoir
(45,850 posts)but that Hercules guy will still get the credit
bemildred
(90,061 posts)Over and over.
azurnoir
(45,850 posts)bemildred
(90,061 posts)zellie
(437 posts)"Publishing anti-Semites, or people who work for websites that traffic in anti-Semitic innuendo or conspiracy theories, empowers ideas aimed at obscuring the humanity of one side of an already-violent conflict."
sad but true
azurnoir
(45,850 posts)wouldn't you agree?
oh BTW welcome to DU 
King_David
(14,851 posts)
frylock
(34,825 posts)This from senior editor at The Atlantic, Robert Wright:
Following Rosen's links left intact the vague impression of Mondoweiss that, on the basis of limited exposure, I already had: It is an edgy website that is highly critical of both Israel and Zionism and features a variety of contributors and--inevitably, given that description--publishes things that are outside the bounds of mainstream political discourse, in the sense that you wouldn't find them in the New York Times or the Wall Street Journal or on NPR. (And, needless to say, it publishes stuff I don't agree with.) But if those eleven links--some dating back to 2009--are the most damning indictment Rosen can assemble from the many thousands of blog posts Mondoweiss has run in recent years, then I don't see how he concludes that Mondoweiss "often gives the appearance of an anti-Semitic enterprise."
http://www.theatlantic.com/international/archive/2012/07/neo-mccarthyism/259849/
you're really not helping when you draw the anti-semite card on every little thing you disagree with.
shira
(30,109 posts)Antony Lerman argues for the "Independent Jewish Voices" statement as follows:
Let's examine some of what Lerman describes as "intensified criticism" of Israel and let's see if some of this "intensified criticism" could reasonably be thought of as being connected to contemporary anti-semitism.
more...
http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2007/feb/09/independentvoices
Shaktimaan
(5,397 posts)for kicks I took a break from posting here to go over there and check it out. There is really no question that the content that I saw in the comments (from a few people in particular), could be classified in no other way but anti-semitism. There was usually the thin veil of "anti-Zionism" drawn over it, but oftentimes not.
Would you like some examples?
And to be truthful here, being a sporty goy-girl, I was never really interested in the neurotic antics and amateur love-lives of short, unhealthy looking guys from ziozville. I mean for real!
And don’t get me started on that zio plant Adam Sandler! C’mon now, who on earth enjoys a close-up of him french-kissing a beautiful girl on the big screen like he’s some kinda Errol flynn?! C’mon tribal zio hollywood casting agents – who you tryna fool!
http://mondoweiss.net/2011/11/streisand-to-sing-at-israeli-soldier-benefit-in-la.html#comment-455785
Even if the circumstances that led (at various times) to the creation or definition or re-definition of (parts) of the Jewish “system” (theology, society, customs, psychology), and even if some or all of the above were even more neurotic than the “systems” of other peoples, the key factor in making these “neuroses” worse than usual was, as the Zios say in another context, the lack of a country with a single people and a well-defined territory. All the other peoples seemed to have these and their own “neuroses” were universally understood to be the normal signs of nationalism, linguistic solidarity, locality-solidarity, etc. Generally, though history, everybody distrusted, sought to defeat, hated, etc., the “others”. But had boundaries to prevent (generally) bloodshed.
The Jews (and Gypsies and I suppose others) had the misfortune to be country-less, dispersed among other people. (Similarly the black people transported to the USA and Caribbean as slaves.) So their neuroses — and those of the people they lived amongst — made coexistence more tenuous than that of people living homogeneously in geographically defined “nations”. Lack of boundaries made friction almost constant. Hence anti-Semitism (and Jewish anti-Goyism.)
OK, after 2000 years (at the VERY least) after the last territorial-national-Jewish presence anywhere, Zionism sprang up. Finally, a territorial-national-Jewish entity! All will be well! And Jews don’t any longer need to assimilate! Wow!
Except that the land was taken by colonial-invasive native-population-expulsive warfare and held and expanded, all according to a discernible plan for such expansion, after the age of colonialism was supposed to have ended. (So sad. A reasonably good idea gone sour due to bad timing.)
And now the neurosis, never far submerged, springs up again, as the Zios cannot — cannot — make peace or give up their plan for expansion, conquest, expulsion, domination, etc., etc., in a world where these neuroses have largely been submerged behind the safe walls of nation-states-at-peace. The Jews had had no practice feeling safe neighbor-to-neighbor, no practice allowing others to feel safe neighbor-to-neighbor, no talent at compromise neighbor-to-neighbor, no practice at self-denial — and where would they get any such practice after 2000 years in a world run by other people, a world without Jewish national-territory-and-sovereignty?
http://mondoweiss.net/2012/05/whos-the-anti-semite.html/comment-page-1#comment-449891
holdencaufield
(2,927 posts)Antisemitism not only has a place in the debate over Israel. It has a box seat with a cushion. As people run out of ways to demonize Israel, they have to dig into their 2,000-year old bag of tricks for some "new material". Jews control world governments, Jews control the media, Jews are pulling the strings...
The antisemitism in the debate (and it exists, Virginia) points out precisely why Israel has to exist. It's a good reminder that we've all seen this before and I have no doubt, we'll see it again.
shaayecanaan
(6,068 posts)You once had your photo taken/shook hands with/drank coffee with/sat on a board with someone who turned out to be a sex offender/tax cheat/terrorist and now you're vicariously responsible for everything that the said person may have done in their lives.
The only direct quotes that the above article offers from the Mondoweiss website are the following sentences:-
"I can justly be accused of being a conspiracy theorist because I believe in the Israel lobby theory ... certainly my theory has an explanation of the rise and influence of the neocons. They don't have a class interest but an ideological-religious one."
I think once you expand the definition of "anti-semitism" to encompass sentences such as the above you run the risk of reducing its meaning and impact as a concept - although to a large extent this has happened already.
oberliner
(58,724 posts)I really do think you will find items that will set off you antisemitism detector.
Scootaloo
(25,699 posts)When you have to resort to calling people who disagree with you "traitors to the Jewish people," "judenrat," "kapos," and the like... that's still antisemitism, after all.
shira
(30,109 posts)Scootaloo
(25,699 posts)At least, it's real in your private universe where attempting to bar a Jewish man from his religious observances because of his politics isn't antisemitism, but calling settlements illegal is.
shira
(30,109 posts)Scootaloo
(25,699 posts)Stop pretending you speak for people, Shira. If you're going to insist on embarrassing yourself, stick to doing it in your usual way.
shira
(30,109 posts)...to be antisemitism.
Let me know what you find.
Response to shira (Reply #53)
Post removed
shira
(30,109 posts)LeftishBrit
(41,219 posts)Firstly, 'antisemitic' is a term invented by Europaean antisemites, to refer to a hostility toward Jews on (pseudo)-racial grounds, rather than simply religious or cultural grounds. A person who is 'anti-Jewish' as a form of religious bigotry may still accept a Jew who converts and assimilates; an 'antisemite' rejects all of Jewish ancestry, even if they conform to their current country's religon anc culture.
And questioning 'are Ashkenazim Semites' is following the same sort of pseudo-racial bigoted theories. In fact, I don't think you realize HOW disgusting it is to any Ashkenazi, or probably any Jewish, reader. Basically, having been told by the classical Europaean antisemites that we are 'semites' and not real Europaeans, who have no place in Europe, we are now being told by you that this very antisemitism can't exist because we're not Middle Easterners or speakers of semitic languages. On the one hand, antisemitism was justified by them because we aren't racially pure enough Europaeans; on the other, to you antisemitism doesn't and didn't exist because we aren't racially pure enough Jews?
Ruby the Liberal
(26,219 posts)I'm all ears.
oberliner
(58,724 posts)Those quotes that you reference - are they from actual op-ed pieces in the Jerusalem Post or just from posted comments?
I would assert that you would find antisemitism on Mondoweiss in some of the actual articles themselves, not just the comments.
As for JPost, I would agree that the comments section would have that sort of thing, but not the actual articles themselves (though some are certainly decidedly right-wing).
In any case, are you agreeing that Mondoweiss sets off your anti-semitism detector and just adding that JPost does so too?
Scootaloo
(25,699 posts)And my skimming hasn't set off any red lights yet.
Granted, it's a quarter 'til five in the morning, and I'm not at my best to evaluate a fuck-ton of articles that, at first glimpse, need a better editor.
oberliner
(58,724 posts)I'd be curious to know your thoughts once you've spent more time at that site (if you decide doing so is worth your time - which it very well may not be).
Shaktimaan
(5,397 posts)How is that anti-semitism?
I read on mondoweiss that Jews have a collective personality disorder that is actually genetic and is the cause of most of their problems throughout history. To me, THAT is anti-semitism. Calling someone a traitor to the best interests of Jews is merely rude.
shaayecanaan
(6,068 posts)my general impression is that the comments are quite frequently over the top; however the articles themselves, while occasionally shrill, are not what you would reasonably call anti-semitic.
I think the gist of the OP is that a consumer boycott of Israeli products is a priori antisemitic. The problem is that consumer boycotts, particularly on the left side of politics, are a dime a dozen. The boycotts of South Africa come to mind, but I do remember about ten years ago there was a serious boycott of French products due to French nuclear testing in the Pacific. I remember that a lot of Citroen dealerships actually closed after that, there are still not very many Citroen cars on the road around here.
The pity is that all this stuff occasionally distracts from articles that are anti-semitic. I remember an article on Counterpunch that seriously posited that there might have some truth to the medieval blood libels. I saw the reference to it on this forum I think, but had I not chanced to click on it, I probably would have dismissed it as the usual bloviating from the usual blowhards around here, and thats a shame, because that sort of stuff really deserves to be stigmatised.
Some of the tropes from the hasbarados are just absurd. For example, the habit of putting "libel" on the end of the flavour of the month and assuming that a scandal is upon us, rather like the lazy habit of affixing "-gate" to every supposed political scandal that makes it to print.
Eg
Gaza beach libel
al dura libel
organ theft libel
flotilla libel
Personally, I am very reticent about boycotts. I never really liked them in Iraq, or in Iran. They generally hurt people a world away from their intended targets. And they very rarely work. South Africa was an exception, largely because even the United States had joined the boycott and the writing was truly on the wall. I think, tactically, it would be more preferable to advocate a boycott of settlement produce, it would be far easier to create a consensus around that.
Scootaloo
(25,699 posts)<snip>
This isn't the first time Rosen has offered himself as an attack dog. He distinguished himself during his time in a joint Jewish Theological Seminary/Columbia University program by being an especially shrill voice in the campaigns to deny Joseph Massad tenure at Columbia Although Massad was far from the only professor Rosen disapproved of. He also had issues with Mahmoud Mamdani and Hamid Dabashi -- notice a trend?
<snip>
Rosen’s conduct toward Massad is similar to his conduct with us. He’s namecalling in an effort to establish a redline in the discourse. He doesn’t want our voices granted any legitimacy. And the reason is obvious. We are unremitting critics of what Israel looks like today and what Zionism had produced for Palestine, the US and American Jewish life; and because Americans are opening themselves up to these ideas, we are getting more attention from the mainstream. Rosen is doing his utmost to shut the door on us.
<snip>
Ultimately, this is not about Alex or Mondoweiss. It is about the larger issue of policing the discourse on Israel in this country. It is about the routine use of smears to discredit your opposition. It is about the tired use of the word “anti-Semitism” to shut down debate over Israel--a use that has cheapened that word to mean “anyone who critiques Israel.”
This is a link, because you're supposed to link when you post articles. it's not hard, some people should try it.
shira
(30,109 posts)...as self-proclaimed anti-racists who fight bigotry.
Mondoweiss' criticism of Israel is one thing. Let them criticize all they want. But when they use pretty much every antisemitic trope in the book when doing so (dual loyalty, jewish power, nazi comparisons, blood libel, Jewish supremacy) it's old, smelly bigotry.
Thanks for the reminder to post a link.
Scootaloo
(25,699 posts)Simply offering Mondoweiss' rebuttal to the article you excerpted - and forgot to link 
shira
(30,109 posts)...in their criticism of Israel. So you're quoting from a bigoted source attempting to defend their own bigotry.
I suspect the losers at Mondoweiss know how to criticize women, gays, blacks, and Muslims without using bigoted tropes while doing so. For some reason, they're intentionally oblivious when it comes to Jews.
Scootaloo
(25,699 posts)I'm not inclined to take you or any of your sources as the "final word" on a damned thing though. Because I HAVE read enough of you to form an opinion on you, and when I see a frothing bigot call someone else a frothing bigot, I'm inclined to take the statement with a grain of salt.
or a one-ton pallet of NaCl...
My point there though, is just to provide the rebuttal for others to read. Don't get your knickers in such a twist, Shira.
shira
(30,109 posts)Makes sense.
And of course, you had to throw in your own accusations of my alleged bigotry. When your own arguments are shit, I suppose the bigotry card is all you've got. Pretty lame.
Warren Stupidity
(48,181 posts)It is the standard libel against any criticism of Israel. But thanks for the link, I'd never heard of mondoweiss before.
Warren Stupidity
(48,181 posts)The author tosses that reference into the article to set the stage, but of course never actually makes the claim that mondoweiss did such a thing. The article you linked is a dishonest pile of shit.
shira
(30,109 posts)...at Mondoweiss.
Scootaloo
(25,699 posts)Or is it just another one of those things you don't have to read because you "just know"?
shira
(30,109 posts)http://mondoweiss.net/2011/01/israeli-occupation-as-brutal-as-nazis-elkana-holocaust-survivor.html
http://mondoweiss.net/2011/06/1919-hitler-letter-reveals-seeds-of-ethnic-cleansing.html
That's just the tip of the iceberg.
You may want to google Mondoweiss with either warsaw, germany, nazi, ghetto, genocide, etc.. and you'll find one hit after another.
Shaktimaan
(5,397 posts)but I have personally seen TONS of comments on Mondoweiss that say exactly that, and many that go several steps beyond. ie: "Zionists have no hearts, they only get joy from causing other people (Palestinians) suffering" or "There is no such thing as a liberal Zionist. Zionism at its core espouses racial superiority, apartheid and genocide. These elements are such central features of Zionism that it is not possible to identify with the movement without also embracing them. Therefore to identify as a Zionist must entail embracing fascism and racism." And my all time favorite, seen again and again.... "Zionists are evil."
I can point you to examples of the above and worse at the drop of a shekel.
