Professor Beeson Replies

geoffff

Recently this blog posted on an article at the Conversation by Prof Mark Beeson of Murdoch University about the IDF operations in Gaza.

geoffff

Human Rights Activist and Animal Protector

"John Mearsheimer and Stephen Walt’s important book may not have earned them many friends, but it did a valuable service in revealing just how powerful and influential the Jewish lobby is in the US."

Actually Mearsheimer and Walt's thoroughly discredited book has earned them an enormous number of friends. This always does. They took the well trodden path from obscure academia to global celebrity by the time honoured method of attacking Israel and the Jews.

American Jews are probably overrepresented in neo conservative and centre or centre right intellectual discourse. Certainly they are in pro-Israel and Zionist activity of all kinds but only the blinkered and worse would draw M and W's conclusions from that. Jews are also over represented among Democrats, charity workers, left wing and revolutionary politics, the professions, universities, British conservatives, those who show up to vote in elections, until recently the ALP, Animal Liberation and for all I know the RSPCA.

So what. What exactly is your point? That a disproportionate number of Jews are activists? You really don't need to write a book to prove that.

People complaining about Jews being "over represented" and therefore having disproportionate influence is the oldest trope in antisemitism. Of course pro-Israel voices in the US are strong, there are many, but only the ignorant think of this as a monolith and only the bigoted see some kind of a conspiracy in this.

One might have hoped we had got past this sort of thing by now.

There are many lobbies in the US just like here. The "Palestinians", Arab Americans, Muslims, teachers, academics, the oil industry all have lobbies. Big Oil has had a bigger influence on American foreign policy than the Jews and it is not at all benign or pro-Israel.

The "gotcha" thesis of these academics about the Jews (remember that American and Israeli Jews are about 90% of the world's Jews) is risible and deplorable. A generation earlier and they would have been clamouring for quotas in the universities to keep the numbers in "proportion". These days I guess they would target east Asians if they could.

American Jews are pro-Israel for exactly the same reasons as most American are pro-Israel. It is because they are pro-American. It is because of the absolute moral clarity of this issue.

The Jews are a tiny minority in the US, less than 2%. To attribute to them some kind of sinister power over the US and the West should be unacceptable in the West even if it is unquestioned orthodoxy across much of the world and especially in the Muslim world.

It should be unacceptable precisely because of that.

Prof Beeson  posted in reply:

Mark Beeson

Professor of International Politics at Murdoch University

In reply to geoffff

Thanks for the thoughtful response, Geoff. The points about the US political system being open to a variety of influences are good ones and well taken. But do you really think that US policy toward Israel and Palestine is even-handed?

Why does nearly every American leader or politician feel obliged to intone to the ritual declaration about Israel's right to defend itself, with little comment about the means? Why is it that a successful middle-income state is the largest recipient of American aid? Surely you would concede that Israel occupies a place in American foreign policy practise and thinking that no other state does?

The blog replies

geoffff

Human Rights Activist and Animal Protector

In reply to Mark Beeson

All of this is military aid. Much of it must be spent in the US as part of the overall US military and defence investment. .

The glib and simple answer to the question however is that no other successful middle income strategically critical ally of the US faces anything like the existential threat that Israel does

The last time would probably have been 1940. The US did much the same thing then that it does now. Sure Israel receives much energy in Washington but that has little to do with the "Lobby". The "Lobby" sees itself primarily in an educational role and as a counter to a hugely determined and aggressive campaign against Israel out of all proportion to its size or even its relative impact on the Arab world and the "Palestinians".

Nor is it a one way street. Israel projects US influence in the Middle East. It is a major source of intelligence about events in the Arab world, an active partner in anti-terrorist operations and increasingly important economically and as a source of leading edge technology including military technology.

Drones and remote warfare were pioneered in Israel, and if the US funded Iron Dome, the enormous leap in technology it represents is shared.

I do admit to some nerve pain at the constant, and yes, almost ritualistic, affirmations about Israel's right to exist, but not for the reason you infer. I can think of no other state where this needs to be even mentioned, let alone constantly intoned as the root cause of a conflict.

That is the rub with the "Palestinian" cause. At its core it not a genuine national movement, or if it is, it is something new and quite threatening.. Its central drive is not for a state but for the destruction and supercession of a state.

There can be no even handedness between Israel and "Palestine" because "Palestine" is not a state like Israel or any other state.

"Palestine' is an antistate. The first in history. .

And that of course is the end of the conversation.

cross posted Geoffff's Joint

Petition to Defund UNRWA

Michael L.

I received a note from Mets102, of Daily Kos and Progressive Zionist fame, and I promised him that I would do what I can do to alert people to this petition.

Petition to defund the United Nations Relief and Works Agency (UNRWA):

Terrorist missiles have been found in three separate UNRWA schools in Gaza in three separate instances. It is clear that UNRWA is either unable or uninterested in preventing terrorists from using its schools as rocket warehouses. These rockets have subsequently been returned to the terrorists that are "Gaza authorities."

These missiles are used to terrorize the civilian population of our ally, Israel, where citizens have as little as 15 seconds to flee for shelter when one of those rockets is launched at Israel.

Through its inability and/or disinterest UNRWA is complicit in the use of its facilities as rocket warehouses. The United States is UNRWA's largest contributor. Our government should therefore cease our funding of UNRWA.

I would very much encourage anyone who cares about eventual peace between the Arabs and the Jews in the Middle East to sign this petition.  UNRWA is not in the business of ameliorating and ending the ongoing Arab refugee problem, but of continuing it generation upon generation.

The purpose of UNRWA, ultimately, is to maintain the local Arab fighting population who are used against the Jews in that part of the world by the greater Arab and Muslim powers that dominate the United Nations.

To fund UNRWA is to fund the long Arab war against the Jews in the Middle East.

Of course, it should be defunded.

Concision

Michael L.



I like this bit because it is mainly accurate and gets the point across in a concise manner.

A Tip 'O the Kippa to the Elder Guy.

Saddam Hussein's concept of justice

Sar Shalom

One of the many books covering the changes in Iraq from before to after Saddam Hussein's ouster is Joseph Braude's The New Iraq. Among the topics covered in this book is the rebuilding of Iraq's justice system in the post-Saddam era. In describing this task, Braude started with a description of Saddam's concept of justice. Rather than present an overriding theme, Braude presented an anecdote to illustrate how Saddam thought the courts should pursue justice.

Summarizing from my memory of having read it several years ago, one time, while Saddam was traveling, he got hungry and started looking for a food stand that would provide him with something to eat. One street vendor, on seeing him pass by, said "O Saddam, to whom I owe my life, let me provide you with something to eat." Saddam placed an order, which the vendor fulfilled. After being impressed with the meal he had had, Saddam asked the vendor if there was anything he could do to pay him. The vendor replied that it was enough that Saddam provided for his life. After much back-and-forth, Saddam finally got the vendor to open up that he had a dispute with someone in the courts. The courts resolved that this vendor would get what he wanted from the process.

There are some similarities in some counties in America when it comes to tort law. In particularly plaintiff-freindly counties, all that's needed to secure a favorable verdict is to demonstrate that the plaintiff was injured and some involvement of the defendant. In other counties, those that are defendant-friendly, any plaintiff who does not match the profile of the surrounding community has no chance to prevail, no matter what the facts are. Either way, facts are irrelevant, it is simply a matter of doing "justice," for the plaintiff in the former category and for the defendant in the latter.

Such is the case of how the international community pursues "justice" when Israel is involved. From their perspective, Israel is victimizing the Palestinians by expropriating the land that is "rightfully" theirs. Thus whenever a case comes up and there is an opportunity to ameliorate the suffering Israel "imposes" on the Palestinians, the attitude becomes "facts shmacts, do what is necessary to justify the result."

This phenomenon occurs in both official international fora, such as the ICJ, and in the international media. To take one of the most recent example from international fora, the UNHCR voted to investigate Israel's "crimes" in connection with Operation Protective Edge. For the UN, it was enough that Israel was attacking targets in Gaza and that innocents were dieing. What standards Israel should be compared against for target selection and precautions were irrelevant. After, "justice" has to be done for the Palestinians.

Similarly, in their coverage of Operation Protective Edge, the international media don't bother looking in to Israel's claims as to what is at the targets or comparing Israel's precautions against killing civilians to anyone else's precautions. It is simply a matter of doing "justice," and if a distorted picture leads people to be more interested in pursuing "justice," then that what is needed.

Join the American Red Cross!

Michael L.

On Sunday, July 27, United States House Minority Leader, Nancy Pelosi (D-CA), spoke with CNN correspondent, Candy Crowley, about the Obama presidency and its relationship with the Russians and the Israelis.  Toward the end of this conversation, after confirming Israel's security needs, Pelosi said the following:

We have to support the Palestinians and what they need. And we have to confer with the Qataris, who have told me over and over again that Hamas is a humanitarian organization...

Needless to say, this raised the question of whether or not Pelosi considers Hamas, like the Red Cross, to be a "humanitarian organization."  It has to be noted, first and foremost, that Pelosi has been on record for a very long time recognizing Hamas as a terrorist organization.  There is no question but that Minority Leader Pelosi claims to oppose Hamas for the very same reason that all secular liberals should.

Hamas is an Islamist regime that, by definition, wants to see al-Sharia as the basis of government and, therefore, women treated as property, Gay people murdered outright on religious grounds, all non-Muslims subject to second and third-class non-citizenship within the system of dhimmitude, and Jews kept readily available for genocide.

{By the way, my favorite of the old-timey dhimmitude rules is the one that declared that Jews are not allowed to ride horses, only donkeys.  The purpose of the system, it must be understood, was not merely forced submission, but humiliation in the eyes of Allah.}

So, just why did Pelosi tell the American people that, according to Qataris, Hamas is a "humanitarian organization"?  Why repeat such utter nonsense to the American public?  If someone with Nancy Pelosi's stature says something like this on CNN to Candy Crowley it can cause millions of Americans to think that, well, maybe Hamas is, in fact, a "humanitarian organization."

In my surprise that representative Pelosi, my former representative in Washington D.C., made such a remark, I wrote a small piece on Israel Thrives entitled, Does Pelosi Think that Hamas is a "Humanitarian Organization".  

Here is a tid-bit:

Of course, one must wonder just what she was thinking, therefore, when she raised the point with Crowley, to begin with.  The clear and obvious implication is that Pelosi is sympathetic to that point of view. 

If this is the case it can only mean that Pelosi believes that a genocidal organization that calls specifically for the slaughter of the Jewish people can be a "humanitarian organization."  Either that or she is so woefully ignorant of the Middle East and Israel that she should very definitely remain silent on the matter.

Nancy Pelosi is the ranking Democratic member of the House Committee on Intelligence.  There is no possible way that she does not understand that Hamas is a terrorist organization.  In order to confirm this I wrote a note to Drew Hammill, Pelosi's Deputy Communications Director in Washington D.C. asking him to clarify that Pelosi does not believe that Hamas is a "humanitarian organization" and asking him why she would have raised the point to begin with on national television?

To Hammill's credit he responded in a timely manner and this is what he had to say:

As Leader Pelosi reiterated in her CNN interview, Hamas is a terrorist organization.  As also stated, she believes that in supporting a two-state solution, we must support Abbas, we must support Israel’s Iron Dome initiative and we must support the humanitarian needs of the Palestinians.  She also believes that engaging the Qataris, who refer to Hamas as a humanitarian organization and fund such needs, would put additional pressure on Hamas to stop the rockets attacks and destroy all tunnels.

I very much wonder about that final sentence because it raises more questions than it answers.

I have no reason to doubt the fine intentions of either Nancy Pelosi, or her staff, when it comes to the well-being of the Jewish State of Israel, but are we honestly to believe that Qatar is going to pressure Hamas to reign in the rocketeers and destroy the tunnels that threaten Jewish lives?

I told Mr. Hammill that I have nothing against representative Pelosi and that I would endeavor to be fair if I took up this conversation.  Well, I have taken it up and I do think that I am being fair.

Nancy Pelosi's office is telling us that Qatar might use its influence with Hamas to encourage them not to bomb Israel and to dismantle the terror tunnels.

Are we honestly supposed to believe that this is a credible position for the leading Democrat in the United States House of Representatives?

Given the fact that Qatar funds Hamas' efforts to murder Jews it is rather unlikely that it would use its influence to encourage Hamas not to murder Jews.  In fact, I feel reasonably comfortable in asserting that the very reason Qatar funds Hamas is precisely because Hamas is in The Jew Killing Industry.  The very point of Hamas' existence is to harass and murder the Jews of the Middle East, for the purpose of demoralizing them, while crying to the western-left that ZioNazi Imperial Colonialists are being mean to the bunny-like "indigenous" population.

I do not believe that Pelosi is malicious.

I suppose that what we are left with is either "shockingly naive" or "not really very intelligent."

I'll go with the former.

A Knesset Member Warns Europe

Michael L.

In an article for the Algemeiner, Dave Bender tell us that before a contingent of ambassadors and other dignitaries from all over Europe former Shin Bet chief and current member of the Knesset under Kadima, Israel Hasson, said “If European countries fail to protect their Jews, the State of Israel will. Jewish blood is not cheap blood.”

That is quite a statement and it comes directly on the heels of the first French pogrom since World War II:

On Sunday a mob surrounded the Synagogue de la Roquette in Paris, trapping its occupants inside and fighting with security.

Three members of the Paris Jewish community ended up in the hospital, according to a witness.

“The attackers splintered off an anti-Israel demonstration and advanced toward the synagogue when it was full,” said Alain Azria, a French Jewish journalist who covered the event.

Azria said when the demonstrators arrived at the central Paris synagogue, the five police officers on guard blocked the entrance as the protesters chanted anti-Semitic slogans and hurled objects at the synagogue and the guards. He said nearly 200 congregants were inside.

“They were determined to enter and the police did not have enough forces,” he said.

Was Mr. Hasson serious in the idea that Israel would put boots on the ground in Europe to protect Jews?  Although I appreciate the sentiment, I find it rather hard to imagine.  Israeli military and intelligence forces have, of course, operated all over the world, but it is difficult to see just what Israel can do when an Arab and leftist mob forms in Paris and then targets a synagogue, with 200 Jews trapped inside, for violence.

Having said that, I would nonetheless encourage Israel to do what it reasonably can do to protect European Jewry.  Jews are on the run throughout the continent of Europe and, in my opinion, need to get the hell out of there.  I would recommend that European Jewry move to Israel and, if not Israel, then either the United States, Australia, or Canada.

Besides, Europe is being devoured from within by malicious Islamists that the Europeans were foolish enough to invite into their societies.  There is nothing wrong with inviting Muslims from the Middle East or North Africa to come live in Europe if they wish to integrate and become a harmonious part of European society.  Of course, what we are seeing is a general refusal, on a large part of the emigre population, to integrate.  Instead they insist upon Sharia courts and Sharia neighborhoods patrolled by Virtue Thugs and no-go zones for European police within some Muslim communities.

I say that now is probably a very good time for Jews to get out of Europe.

Join the American Red Cross!

Michael L.

On Sunday, July 27, United States House Minority Leader, Nancy Pelosi (D-CA), spoke with CNN correspondent, Candy Crowley, about the Obama presidency and its relationship with the Russians and the Israelis.  Toward the end of this conversation, after confirming Israel's security needs, Pelosi said the following:

We have to support the Palestinians and what they need. And we have to confer with the Qataris, who have told me over and over again that Hamas is a humanitarian organization...

Needless to say, this raised the question of whether or not Pelosi considers Hamas, like the Red Cross, to be a "humanitarian organization."  It has to be noted, first and foremost, that Pelosi has been on record for a very long time recognizing Hamas as a terrorist organization.  There is no question but that Minority Leader Pelosi claims to oppose Hamas for the very same reason that all secular liberals should.

Hamas is an Islamist regime that, by definition, wants to see al-Sharia as the basis of government and, therefore, women treated as property, Gay people murdered outright on religious grounds, all non-Muslims subject to second and third-class non-citizenship within the system of dhimmitude, and Jews kept readily available for genocide.

{By the way, my favorite of the old-timey dhimmitude rules is the one that declared that Jews are not allowed to ride horses, only donkeys.  The purpose of the system, it must be understood, was not merely forced submission, but humiliation in the eyes of Allah.}

So, just why did Pelosi tell the American people that, according to Qataris, Hamas is a "humanitarian organization"?  Why repeat such utter nonsense to the American public?  If someone with Nancy Pelosi's stature says something like this on CNN to Candy Crowley it can cause millions of Americans to think that, well, maybe Hamas is, in fact, a "humanitarian organization."

In my surprise that representative Pelosi, my former representative in Washington D.C., made such a remark, I wrote a small piece on Israel Thrives entitled, Does Pelosi Think that Hamas is a "Humanitarian Organization".  

Here is a tid-bit:

Of course, one must wonder just what she was thinking, therefore, when she raised the point with Crowley, to begin with.  The clear and obvious implication is that Pelosi is sympathetic to that point of view. 

If this is the case it can only mean that Pelosi believes that a genocidal organization that calls specifically for the slaughter of the Jewish people can be a "humanitarian organization."  Either that or she is so woefully ignorant of the Middle East and Israel that she should very definitely remain silent on the matter.

Nancy Pelosi is the ranking Democratic member of the House Committee on Intelligence.  There is no possible way that she does not understand that Hamas is a terrorist organization.  In order to confirm this I wrote a note to Drew Hammill, Pelosi's Deputy Communications Director in Washington D.C. asking him to clarify that Pelosi does not believe that Hamas is a "humanitarian organization" and asking him why she would have raised the point to begin with on national television?

To Hammill's credit he responded in a timely manner and this is what he had to say:

As Leader Pelosi reiterated in her CNN interview, Hamas is a terrorist organization.  As also stated, she believes that in supporting a two-state solution, we must support Abbas, we must support Israel’s Iron Dome initiative and we must support the humanitarian needs of the Palestinians.  She also believes that engaging the Qataris, who refer to Hamas as a humanitarian organization and fund such needs, would put additional pressure on Hamas to stop the rockets attacks and destroy all tunnels.

I very much wonder about that final sentence because it raises more questions than it answers.

I have no reason to doubt the fine intentions of either Nancy Pelosi, or her staff, when it comes to the well-being of the Jewish State of Israel, but are we honestly to believe that Qatar is going to pressure Hamas to reign in the rocketeers and destroy the tunnels that threaten Jewish lives?

I told Mr. Hammill that I have nothing against representative Pelosi and that I would endeavor to be fair if I took up this conversation.  Well, I have taken it up and I do think that I am being fair.

Nancy Pelosi's office is telling us that Qatar might use its influence with Hamas to encourage them not to bomb Israel and to dismantle the terror tunnels.

Are we honestly supposed to believe that this is a credible position for the leading Democrat in the United States House of Representatives?

Given the fact that Qatar funds Hamas' efforts to murder Jews it is rather unlikely that it would use its influence to encourage Hamas to make nice with Israel.  In fact, I feel reasonably comfortable in asserting that the very reason Qatar funds Hamas is because Hamas refuses to make nice with the Jewish people.  The very point of Hamas' existence is to harass and murder the Jews of the Middle East, for the purpose of demoralizing them, while crying to the western-left that ZioNazi Imperial Colonialists are being mean to the bunny-like "indigenous" population.

I do not believe that Pelosi is malicious.

I suppose that what we are left with is either "shockingly naive" or "not really very intelligent."

I'll go with the former.

While global anti-Semitism surges, don't forget U.S. campuses

Tammi Rossman-Benjamin

Amid the current unrest in Israel and Gaza, Jews around the world have been targeted for attack. Virulently anti-Israel demonstrations and activities in cities across Europe and around the world have resulted in frightening anti-Jewish violence.

Meanwhile, in the U.S. right now, school is out and students are safe. But there is little doubt that when the academic year commences, Jewish students on American college and university campuses will be targeted for harassment, intimidation, bullying, and worse, solely because of their actual or perceived identification with the Jewish state.

First, let’s take stock of the global picture for Israel. In Paris, a synagogue was firebombed while hundreds of worshippers were inside. And in a Paris suburb, anti-Israel rioters torched a synagogue, Jewish school, businesses, and cars. In Berlin, demonstrators charged a Jewish couple and shouted “Jew, we’ll get you” after seeing that the man was wearing a yarmulke.

In the Netherlands, the chief rabbi’s home was attacked with stones twice in one week. In Turkey, the Israeli Consulate in Istanbul and the embassy in Ankara were attacked, and an Islamist close to Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan urged Muslims to target the country’s 15,000 Jews and warned that Jewish tourists to Turkey would be attacked. In Morocco, a rabbi was bad-ly beaten in retaliation for Israel’s airstrikes on Gaza. In Australia, a Jew was punched by men screaming “Jewish dog” in Arabic as he walked in a Jewish neighborhood.

In Canada, at an anti-Israel rally organized by the President of the University of Calgary pro-Palestinian club, two Jewish women were kicked and punched by a large group of angry men, and portions of the crowd chanted “Kill Jews” and “Hitler was right.” In Los Angeles, Jews at a pro-Israel rally were assaulted with sticks wielded by four men waving pro-Palestinian flags. In Boston, Jewish students had to be extracted by police from a pro-Hamas rally, at which demonstrators chanted “Jews back to Birkenau.”
                                                                                           
Now back to American campuses. As we all know, the college campus is a hotbed for anti-Israel sentiment.  Is there any reason to believe that the global anti-Zionist surge won’t permeate U.S. campuses once the school year starts? This new flood of anti-Jewish sentiment will come to campuses already racked by the virulently anti-Israel actions of student groups such as Students for Justice in Palestine (SJP), whose members are often aided and abetted by anti-Israel faculty. Last semester alone, numerous Jewish students across the country reported feeling unsafe on their campuses. Here are their firsthand accounts:

At DePaul University: “This entire campaign and entire sit-in going on in the SAC (Schmitt Academic Center) is totally unsafe for Jewish students and I have had a lot of Jewish students text me and call me today and tell me they are not comfortable walking through that part of our campus, which is really disheartening… About two months ago when SJP started the ‘DePaul Divest’ campaign, I no longer felt safe on this campus and I no longer felt I could be a proud Jewish student.”

At New York University: “Being very straightforward, [the slipping of anti-Israel eviction notices under dorm-room doors by SJP members] made me feel targeted and unsafe in my own dorm room, and I know others feel exactly the same as myself.”

At the University of California, Los Angeles: “For myself and other Jewish and pro-Israel students, the atmosphere is poisonous. We feel attacked, ostracized, and threatened. Our identities are being rejected and our right to express our beliefs endangered. Our academic performance is being harmed unjustly; and our supporters are now targets of hate campaigns, baseless accusations, and unfair political and social retaliation.”

At the University of Michigan: “It was not just individual students who were the victims of violent threats and intimidation by pro-Palestinian forces. Student government representatives were similarly targeted and, most telling, called ‘kike’ and a ‘dirty Jew.’ Both CSG (Central Student Government) representatives and ordinary students were afraid to attend their classes because they felt unsafe.”

At Vassar College: “This year, SJP has made Vassar an unsafe environment for me and for other Jewish students. From their harassment of students participating in the spring break trip, to the Nazi incident and anti-Zionist rhetoric about ethnic cleansing that verges on blood libel, SJP has done everything in its power to make Vassar an unsafe space for Jews.”

Despite the clear and present danger for Jewish students on U.S. campuses, in most cases university administrators have been unwilling to address the problem, preferring instead to defend the freedom of speech or academic freedom of the student and faculty perpetrators. Moreover, Jewish students are well aware that hateful behavior which would never be tolerated by university administrators if directed at other minority groups is perfectly acceptable when directed against Jews, and they experience this blatant double standard as yet another form of anti-Jewish bigotry.

The vulnerability of Jewish students on U.S. campuses is further compounded by the unwillingness of the federal government to protect them from the hostile environment they are experiencing. Seth Galanter, the Assistant Secretary for Civil Rights who was responsible for dismissing several federal anti-discrimination complaints filed on behalf of Jewish students who were being severely harassed, intimidated, and bullied by their fellow students and faculty, has stated that the U.S. Department of Education’s Office of Civil Rights will not even consider complaints in which “offensive conduct [is] based on an individual’s support for… the policies of a particular nation.” In other words, if Jewish students are being harassed because of their real or perceived identification with the Jewish state, no matter how severe the harassment—even to the point of physical assault—they cannot count on protection under federal anti-discrimination law.

In light of the alarming rise in global anti-Semitism and the unwillingness of university or government officials to protect Jewish students from campus-based anti-Semitic activity, it is fair to say that when Jewish students return to school in the fall, they will be the single-most vulnerable students on campus.

The Jewish community must act now. As university stakeholders—students, parents, alumni, donors, and taxpayers—members of the Jewish community and their supporters have every right to use their influence as consumers and funders to demand that Jewish students are protected from the growing scourge of Jew-hatred on U.S. college campuses.

Tammi Rossman-Benjamin is a lecturer at the University of California, Santa Cruz and co-founder of the AMCHA Initiative, a non-profit organization that combats anti-Semitism on college campuses.

Does Pelosi Think that Hamas is a "Humanitarian Organization"?

Michael L.

There is something fundamentally wrong with the Democratic Party and the progressive-left in its understanding of political Islam.  They seem to have no historical understanding of the movement or where it comes from, nor any understanding of the extent or significance of its current activities throughout the Middle East.

This is true, however, only if we assume that the party and the movement actually oppose the rise of political Islam.

This is a shaky proposition, at best.

Today, much to my astonishment, CNN has published the transcript of a conversation between California congresswoman, Nancy Pelosi, and CNN correspondent Candy Crowley.

In this transcript Pelosi says this:

We have to support the Palestinians and what they need. And we have to confer with the Qataris, who have told me over and over again that Hamas is a humanitarian organization...

It is a rather unusual conclusion to an exchange between the two and, to be fair, just because Qataris told Pelosi that Hamas is a humanitarian organization, this does not automatically mean that she believes them.  Of course, one must wonder just what she was thinking, therefore, when she raised the point with Crowley, to begin with.  The clear and obvious implication is that Pelosi is sympathetic to that point of view.

If this is the case it can only mean that Pelosi believes that a genocidal organization that calls specifically for the slaughter of the Jewish people can be a "humanitarian organization."  Either that or she is so woefully ignorant of the Middle East and Israel that she should very definitely remain silent on the matter.

I suspect the latter.

What Shall We Call the Next Gazan Operation?

Michael L.

Whatever semi-non-ceasefires that may have briefly been in place are now concluded.

From Y-Net we learn:

At least four people were killed, while at least six others were wounded, some critically, by mortar fire on Eshkol near the Gaza border early Monday evening.

At 12:40 pm on Monday the unofficial ceasefire between Israel and Hamas was broken when Code Red sirens blared in the Hof Ashkelon Regional Council as four rockets were fired from Gaza. It was reported that the rockets fell within the Gaza Strip.

Why do I get the feeling that "Operation Protective Edge" is not going quite as planned?  In the mean time, the Obama administration, the European Union, the United Nations, and my neighbor's dog, Harvey, are demanding an immediate ceasefire out of the humanitarian necessity of allowing Hamas to recover and rearm.

I have little faith that Netanyahu has the strength to do what is necessary... if by "what is necessary" we mean the elimination of Hamas as a functioning organization in the Gaza Strip.  It is vital and necessary to destroy the rocket infrastructure embedded in Gazan daily life and it is vital and necessary to destroy those insidious terror tunnels and I could not be happier to see the Netanyahu government engaged in those tasks.

But it is also vital and necessary to eliminate Hamas.

I understand that people might say, "Hey man, you're sitting there in your safe and comfortable perch in the Oakland foothills.  You have no actual skin in the game so, perhaps, you should STFU and leave it to the Israelis."

That's fair enough and if I thought for one second that I had even the merest breath of influence over anything that Israel does, the argument would have considerably more weight.  As it is, however, I do not.

Nonetheless, even if I am wrong to publicly call for the elimination of Hamas as a functioning organization in the Gaza Strip - because I will not have to bare the consequences of such an operation - does it not remain true that Hamas' continuity will result, yet again, in a repeat of the conflict in the not too distant future?

In 2008 there was the weirdly translated Operation Cast Lead in the Gaza Strip.

In 2012 there was Operation Pillar of Defense in the Gaza Strip.

In 2014 we have the even more weirdly translated Operation Protective Edge in the Gaza Strip.

I say that we start up a contest to see who will come closest to naming the next Gazan operation in, say, 2016 or 2017.

Heck, we can do this all century if people insist upon it.

{I recommend against, however.}

Mourn for Jerusalem

We are now entering the period of the first nine days of Av. It is now that Sephardim begin the period of mourning for the destruction of the Temple in Jerusalem and when Ashkenazim intensify their mourning. In the spirit of this mourning, this is a clip of a chorus singing Solomone Rossi's setting of Psalm 137, "On the Rivers of Babylon," with a background of Hebrews sitting on the bank of a river with a harp hanging on a tree, as described in the Psalm.



How can we sing the song of Adonai on the foreigner's land
If I forget thee o Jerusalem
May my right hand wither
May my tongue cleave to my palate
If I do no elevate Jerusalem above my greatest joy.

This psalm also presents the start to a response to those who claim that the Palestinians are descended from the Jebusites and/or the Canaanites, that is they claim ancestry to the land from well before Joshua ben Nun conquered it. The question is, where were the Palestinians' ancestors when our ancestors were singing "On the Rivers of Babylon?" Where were they when our ancestors were composing kinot, dirges, such as Yehuda Halevi's "Tzion halo tishali?" Where were they when Dona Gracia Nasi, upon escaping from being a maranno under Christendom and finally being able to live openly as a Jew saw one of her tasks being to reestablish the Jewish community of Tiberias?

Unfortunately, we must accept some of the blame for making Abbas' claim possible. Too often, the narrative we present of our connection to the land goes, as Ruth Calderon put it, from Tnakh to Palmach. As I wrote before, this feeds the narrative that whatever connection we had to the land in the past, it was abandoned and forgotten until the horrors of Europe induced us to remember it. If that is so, that the only connection of the Jewish people to the land of Israel is from the Bible, then any ancestral connection the Palestinians have to the land from before the biblical conquest should trump the Jewish claim. The thing is, that we Jews have a continuous maintenance of their connection to the land at least from the time of Ezra, as is evident in our liturgy, our literature, and our ancestors' patterns of alms-giving through the centuries, which is completely absent among any Arab group.

As this is also the time to commemorate all the other tragedies that have befallen the Jewish people, I have included a clip of Av Harachamim, a dirge written originally to commemorate the communities that were obliterated during the Crusades. The initial custom was to recite it only on the Sabbath before Shavuot, when those communities were uprooted by the Crusades, and the Sabbath before Tisha B'Av, which is still the practice of those communities following the customs of Frankfurt D'Main. However, other communities added other occasions on which to recite Av Harachamim as additional tragedies befell their communities. Eventually, so many occasions were added on which to recite Av Harachamim that the practice in most Askenazic communities became to recite it on any Sabbath which does not have any special reason for celebration. Given the recent tragedies, it seems appropriate to include a prayer that was composed for such unfortunate circumstances.

Jews Need to Bomb More Nursery Schools in Gaza (Semi-Snark)

Michael L.

And not just nursery schools, of course, but elementary schools, as well.

We need to bomb schools and hospitals.

It is exceedingly important that Israel bomb the holy crap out of hospitals... and nursing homes.

We need to bomb nursery schools, hospitals, and nursing homes.  Wherever people are the weakest in Gaza, that is what we must bomb.

And when I say "bomb" I do not mean one little bomb.  What I mean is flatten.

Of course, were it not for the fact that so many Arabs believe they have some Allah-ordained right to kill Jews then Israel would not need to bomb nursery schools and hospitals and nursing homes or any place else where Hamas uses old people and sick people and women and children as a means to defend themselves and their rockets.

Israelis uses rockets to defend their women and children.

Hamasniks uses women and children to defend their rockets.

The bottom line is this, however, if Arabs don't want war they should not wage war.

So long as the Arab majority insists upon bombing the tiny Jewish minority in that part of the world then the Jews of the Middle East are going to defend themselves and what that means is fighting back and what that means is dead Arabs, including children, because civilian populations ALWAYS suffer in war.

Furthermore, given the fact that the brave fighting men of Hamas love to hide their identities behind ski masks and use women and children to defend rockets, it is frankly amazing that there are not thousands of more dead Arabs lying around the streets and rubble of Gaza.

There are two reasons that this is so.

The first reason, of course, is that Jewish self-defense is entirely anathema to so much of the world community which always pressures Israel never to defend itself.  They do not mind when Arabs kill Arabs or Arabs kill Jews or Arabs kill Christians, but Jewish self-defense is traditionally considered unacceptable among both Arabs and secular westerners and when the Jews do defend themselves we are always accused of aggression.

The second reason is Jewish ethics, morality, and self-reflection.  There is virtually nothing in contemporary Jewish culture that justifies the stomping the hell out of anyone for almost any reason and Jews are exceedingly reluctant fighters.

Unfortunately, Israel is in no position not to defend itself.

Unless one thinks that the Jewish people are subhumans that Arabs have every right to bomb then you cannot strenuously complain about Jewish self-defense.  Southern Israel was bombed for years and our western-left friends, who claim to be the stewards of western morality and universal human rights, did not care one whit until finally the Jews stood up in our own self-defense.

I say that we drain the swamp and absolutely eliminate Hamas and if the western-left does not like it, too bad.

Latest Sunday Column for the Elder

Michael L.


The Elder was kind enough to publish my latest Sunday column entitled, Saving Dana Bar-on.

Here is a tid-bit:

To my mind, however, the most chilling part of the video is when she talks about the tunnels. This is a person who has lived most of her life under perpetual rocket fire and now the enemies of the Jewish people are crawling right up out of the ground near her house with an intent to kill her, her family, and her friends.

I can think of no more compelling reason for Israel not merely to degrade Hamas' ability to shoot rockets at Israelis, nor merely to close up those terror tunnels, but to eliminate Hamas completely.

It Is Israel That Is Bone Headed And Intransigent

geoffff

A strange and astonishing attack on Israel and American Jews by an Australian academic at the Conversation who deploys the pre-emptive offensive antisemitism denial at full force.

The compulsion, and it is a compulsion, to deny an allegation that has not been made. Once they do that you have to wonder where their heads are at. 

The joint joined the conversation.

   24 July 2014, 9.47pm AEST

Eyeless, brainless and heartless in Gaza

While there is violent disagreement about who is to blame for the unfolding catastrophe in Gaza, there is less argument about its consequences. A rapidly rising – primarily civilian – death toll is difficult enough to contemplate, let alone justify. Eventually the fighting will cease and talks will begin. The only question is how many women and children will be slaughtered between now and then.

Things might have been different. When John Kerry was appointed as US Secretary of State, he nominated doing something about the ‘Palestinian question’ as one of his key foreign policy goals.

Given how many of Kerry’s predecessors have tried in vain to address this problem, it always looked likely to prove a triumph of experience over hope. Even a passing familiarity with the historical record of American engagement in this part of the world should have given significant pause for thought.

Ironically, at least part of the problems have been caused by the United States. It is not controversial to suggest that no other state exercises as much influence over American foreign policy as Israel. John Mearsheimer and Stephen Walt’s important book may not have earned them many friends, but it did a valuable service in revealing just how powerful and influential the Jewish lobby is in the US.

The possibility that any American president or Secretary of State will be able to deal even-handedly with the protagonists in this conflict is simply laughable.

There are two crucial points to make about this. First, and most importantly, it is not anti-Semitic to point this out. Israel’s lobbyists have become highly skilled at shaping the dominant discourse in this area, and the stock response is to paint critics as closet anti-Semites.

This is simply unjust and gets in the way of any reasoned debate  ...

And so on. Do read on.

My reply among hundreds. You should note that one of Australia's most notorious antisemites, most prolific Israel hating fanatics and occasional Holocaust denier has joined this "reasoned debate" ...

geoffff

Human Rights Activist and Animal Protector

"John Mearsheimer and Stephen Walt’s important book may not have earned them many friends, but it did a valuable service in revealing just how powerful and influential the Jewish lobby is in the US."

Actually Mearsheimer and Walt's thoroughly discredited book have earned them an enormous number of friends. This always does. They took the well trodden path from obscure academia to global celebrity by the time honoured method of attacking Israel and the Jews.

American Jews are probably overrepresented in neo conservative and centre or centre right intellectual discourse. Certainly they are in pro-Israel and Zionist activity of all kinds but only the blinkered and worse would draw M and W's conclusions from that. Jews are also over represented among Democrats, charity workers, left wing and revolutionary politics, the professions, universities, British conservatives, those who show up to vote in elections, until recently the ALP, Animal Liberation and for all I know the RSPCA.

So what. What exactly is your point? That a disproportionate number of Jews are activists? You really don't need to write a book to prove that.

People complaining about Jews being "over represented" and therefore having disproportionate influence is the oldest trope in antisemitism. Of course pro-Israel voices in the US are strong, there are many, but only the ignorant think of this as a monolith and only the bigoted see some kind of a conspiracy in this.

One might have hoped we had got past this sort of thing by now.

There are many lobbies in the US just like here. The "Palestinians", Arab Americans, Muslims, teachers, academics, the oil industry all have lobbies. Big Oil has had a bigger influence on American foreign policy than the Jews and it is not at all benign or pro-Israel.

The "gotcha" thesis of these academics about the Jews (remember that American and Israeli Jews are about 90% of the world's Jews) is risible and deplorable. A generation earlier and they would have been clamouring for quotas in the universities to keep the numbers in "proportion". These days I guess they would target east Asians if they could.

American Jews are pro-Israel for exactly the same reasons as most American are pro-Israel. It is because they are pro-American. It is because of the absolute moral clarity of this issue.

The Jews are a tiny minority in the US, less than 2%. To attribute to them some kind of sinister power over the US and the West should be unacceptable in the West even if it is unquestioned orthodoxy across much of the world and especially in the Muslim world.

It should be unacceptable precisely because of that.

Earlier

1. 
   
   
   

   geoffff

   Human Rights Activist and Animal Protector

   Why is it that so many are so driven to so incessantly deny an allegation that has never been made?

   On the other hand,it is impossible to support Israel and her right to exist without sooner or later being accused of racism. It always happens. Always.

   
   
2. 
   
   

   
   

   geoffff

   Human Rights Activist and Animal Protector

   "There are two crucial points to make about this. First, and most importantly, it is not anti-Semitic to point this out. Israel’s lobbyists have become highly skilled at shaping the dominant discourse in this area, and the stock response is to paint critics as closet anti-Semites."

   The difficulty is that no critic of Israel has ever been able to produce an example of someone serious, seriously suggesting that such criticism is antisemitism. It's been a long search. there have been many appeals in a number of places for an example but with no reports of confirmed sightings that could stand much scrutiny. It's like looking for the Loch Ness Monster. Plenty of denials. The word clouds are dripping with denials of antisemitism from critics of Israel but not a single allegation that criticism of Israel is of itself antisemitism.

   An example please. Just one will do.

   
   
   

   geoffff

   Human Rights Activist and Animal Protector

   "When the UN suggests that Israel may have committed war crimes, clearly something has gone badly wrong. "

   Of course something has gone badly wrong.

   With the UN.