Friday, July 18, 2014

Nagaura and the Ancient Blood Libel Against the Jews

Michael L.

iran cartoon1One of the things that is fascinating about this particular political moment is watching the revival of the kind of medieval slander against the Jewish people which sometimes led Christians in Europe to fling Jewish families down wells.

In every generation we are told just why it is that we deserve a good beating.  Before Germans came into my family's village in the Ukraine and killed them, they told one another just why it is that Jews are in need of murder.

Today the enlightened west acknowledges that our past persecution was unjust.  Your average good-hearted, left-leaning westerner agrees that the persecution of Jews for all those centuries for the alleged killing of a Jewish rabbi in Israel a long time ago was wrong and they will not hesitate to tell you so.

They will also likely agree that blaming capitalism on Jews is probably not fair and that any pogroms or violence due to this particular slander in the past was unjust.  They will also agree that blaming Jews for the rise of socialism was not entirely fair, either.

We all agree, for the most part, that the Jews in the past were largely innocent of the malicious allegations against them and we almost kind of feel bad, maybe, about the historical persecution of the Jewish people.

Today, however, things are different.

As it turns out - Surprise!  Suprise! -  in this generation the Jews actually do have it coming due their mistreatment of the innocent, indigenous Ewoks who live around them.

This is what our friend Nagaura says in a comment on this blog:
Don't worry the IDF will shell hospitals,schools and homes all in the name of protecting Israel. It won't matter to you or any other pro Israel supporter how many innocents are killed they are after all the enemy population.

You'll come back with they are warned by the IDF to evacuate but where are they to evacuate to? The Mediterranean sea or perhaps they can be beamed up by the Starship Enterprise.
It is always important not just to spit back at hatred, but to look at it and discuss it.

I actually like Nagaura because she has the guts to step into what she presumably considers to be enemy territory.  It takes a certain degree of steel in the spine, I suppose, to walk onto unfriendly ground and insist upon your say.

Let us now dissect:
Don't worry the IDF will shell hospitals,schools and homes all in the name of protecting Israel. 
I like this kind of thing because it neatly demonstrates the anti-Semitic anti-Zionist bias embedded tightly within the discourse.

The first thing to notice is Nagaura's malicious assumption that the IDF acts merely in the name of protecting Israel.  The obvious implication, of course, is that the IDF does not actually act in a manner to protect Israel, but only seems to do so "in name" as an insidious pretense for persecuting Arabs... simply for the hell of it.

Also notice the blood libel embedded in the sentence.

Nagaura not only thinks that the Jews of Israel want to bomb hospitals and schools, which is to say, murder sick people and children, but she informs us not to worry about it, with the clear implication that this is what the Jewish people, in general, who tend to be supporters of Israel, want.

In a mere seventeen words she encapsulates so much of the kind of anti-Semitic anti-Zionist discourse that leads to violence against Jews and the justification for that violence among western progressives.
It won't matter to you or any other pro Israel supporter how many innocents are killed they are after all the enemy population.
Here the obvious implication is that pro-Israel supporters are immoral which, needless to say, would make the vast majority of Jews immoral.

So, essentially, Nagaura is telling the world that the Jews are immoral.

Others in the past have made similar claims... including You Know Who.
You'll come back with they are warned by the IDF to evacuate but where are they to evacuate to?
This is a particularly interesting question.  The IDF is the only army in human history that actually warns enemies that their house is going to get bombed and that it might be a good idea to evacuate the family to, say, across the street.

Nagaura presumably thinks that the Jews of Israel just choose houses at random to hit because Arabs live in them.  This is false.  In fact, the very notion is an insult to all Jews, everywhere.  Due to the fact that the Arabs of the Middle East are conducting an ongoing war against the Jewish people, we sometimes blow shit up in our own self-defense.

Such is the nature of war, but it is not a war that we ever wanted.

What vicious leftists like Nagaura refuse to acknowledge is thirteen hundred years of Jewish submission under the boot of Arab-Muslim imperial rule.

She does not care about social justice.

If she cared about social justice she would acknowledge that the Jews in the Middle East are a tiny minority doing their best to survive under intense conditions of religious hatred by a much larger surrounding majority.

Until she grasps that fundamental fact, then she really has nothing of value to say.

What I say is that Jewish self-defense is imperative and that Israel cannot afford to worry too much about the opinions of the Nagaura's of the world.  Nagaura will hate Israel no matter what it does, or does not, do.  That being the case, Israel's first objective should be to secure the safety of its citizenry.

And if Nagaura does not like it, she can go... pound sand.

We apologize for nothing.


  1. After reading this post, go here:

    Cartoons put the matter into a realistic context.

  2. If you start out with accusing someone of being a racist, you are unlikely to persuade them. While it is entirely possible that Nagaura is such a racist, it is also possible that she just does not know that: Hamas stores military equipment in civilian homes, schools and hospitals; Jewish history in Israel/Palestine did not start in 1948, but goes back continuously for at least 2500 years to the time of the return from Babylon; or anything about the history of Muslim oppression of the local Jewish community.

    If someone were to know those facts and still react the way Nagaura did, that would show that the person is racist. In the absence of such knowledge, such reactions are entirely reasonable. Unfortunately, the only sources highlighting such information are the pro-Israel media and are read mostly by those already convinced of the cause and the occasional troll.

    A suggested approach: First ask if Nagaura thinks there are any circumstances under which a rocket launcher should be immune from attack. If yes, then there is nothing further to discuss and that might qualify as reason to label her racist. If the answer is no, continue by asking if she is aware that Israel has produced video and other forms of evidence that homes, schools and hospitals have hosted rocket launchers. Then ask if she is aware of any information contradicting Israel's claim and evidence. Finally, if she is incredulous about the claim, ask what types of evidence would suggest to her either way.

    A final word: this highlights how pernicious the media's coverage of the events is. It seems that if Israel were to say that the Earth goes around the sun, the media will ask if Copernicus' detractors were on to something while Hamas is free to claim that the sun goes around the Earth. The media are showing the same pattern they show in covering domestic politics with everything on the right being equivalent to something on the right. However, there is no one pounding the table about that fact on the Middle East who has nearly the reach Paul Krugman does when he does so about domestic politics.

    1. That's always a fair and desired tactic in most cases, and one I try to remember to engage in first where warranted.

      The particular person to whom this post is a response, on the other hand, has been stopping by this site every other month or so for years and dropping such random bits of antisemitic 'wisdom.'

      This most recent comment was actually one of their least offensive, so far.

      Perhaps even Nagaura is one of those losing their zeal as a result of this particular flare-up, however...

    2. Don't need no lectures from this person, who is either ignorant or malignant, yet past the point of persuasion.

      I save my reasoning and persuasive skills, to the extent they exist, for those that at least present to have an open mind.

    3. School,

      I think that Nagaura is maybe past the point of persuasion, but I do not sense a toxic personality.

      I think that this is a person who sincerely believes what she says and what she believes is that the Jews in the land of Israel have been viciously and unnecessarily malicious toward the Arabs.

      It is as simple as that.

      Of course, I entirely disagree...

    4. No doubt these types believe what they say. It's apparent from the sanctimony. As they lecture others, it's ironic they cannot distinguish between aggression, which is unlawful and which they support, and defense against aggression.

  3. If you knowingly live downstairs from a terrorist shelling Israel, if you knowingly send your kids to school in a building used to hurl rockets at Jews, you have surrendered the right to claim you are innocent.

    The Nuremberg War Crimes Trials settled that question so if Nagaura wants to side with those Nazis and claim "Eet vuz not us vee did not know dis", that's fine. But it's still complete bullshit.

    As far as so called 'collateral damage' is concerned? Tough darts. That's why it's called that. All of Israel is collateral damage.

    1. But what if you're unable to move, or send your children to another school?

      If MOVE took over my rowhouse block and decided to launch another war against the city on Sunday, I wouldn't exactly be able to pick up and head out of here tomorrow.

      And, to put it kindly, I would imagine we live in a place with much more such freedom and autonomy than Gaza.

      Hamas is where all the blame lies.

    2. Nuremberg did not settle this, but the Geneva Convention and Protocols certainly did, codifying customary international law.

      Article 28 of the 4th GC is clear:

      "The presence of a protected person may not be used to render certain points or areas immune from military operations."

    3. Nonsense. The "We didn't know what was happening in the camps" is bullshit. When the camps were liberated they could also grab a shovel to bury the corpses.

      Nope. Sorry but that's how the world is. You don't like Hamas living next door, move or kill them. Why do you think Britain moved hundreds of thousands of children out of London to live with strangers during the blitz?

    4. No, not nonsense. And not what I claimed at all.

      But do have fun being the mirror image of Hamas apologists, Trudy.

    5. Why not take them at their own word. They want human shields, ok. It's not my job to be their better moral angel. Maybe that's you job.

    6. Take who on whose words? When did I ever deny that Hamas wants, and uses, human shields? Or that some of those human shields might even do it eagerly?

      All I wanted to note is that I'm sure it isn't simply a matter of going onto Craigslist Gaza and finding another apartment once the Hamas U-Haul truck pulls up outside, or of organizing a parent-teachers conference to complain to the principal once jihadis burrow into the school basement.

  4. Speaking of blood libels you may have heard about the NBC reporter who was pulled from Gaza after he witnessed kids being killed on a beach. Here's what those atdHamas (aka dKos) think may have happened:

    Who Knows (18+ / 0-)

    Recommended by:
    wu ming, chuckvw, Occulus, Sandino, fb, chloris creator, hassanm, stitchingasfastasIcan, bobswern, SCFrog, mjd in florida, Don midwest, Smoh, Paddy999, greenbell, protectspice, Byrnt, GreatLakeSailor

    Maybe Israel told NBC to pull Mohyeldin or they'd kill him. That kind of tactic would be right up their alley.

    This aggression will not stand, man.

    by kaleidescope on Fri Jul 18, 2014 at 08:45:47 PM PDT

    Yep. Bloodlibels are them......not one HR. What a freaking swamp.

    1. Western leftists think that it is open season on Jews.

      The IDF is letting them know that this is not the case and they are none too happy about it.

    2. Outright ZOG commentary is apparently fair game there now, as well, with more instances than one can count.

      Here are just three examples from one diary, all posted within just a couple hours of each other, and all met with enthusiastic 'recommendations.'

      Oh, but a blatant Holocaust denier (who joined the site in 2009, so obviously not a new troll who just signed up to cause trouble) was at least banned and not uprated, so it's good to know that, for now, Daily Kos draws the line at actual Nazis, at least -

      Is it possible 3 (0+ / 12-)
      Recommended by:
      Hidden by:
      JayinPortland, Mets102, RedsFanForever, ExpatGirl, TomP, blueyedace2, Laurence Lewis, BradyB, i understand, Steveningen, Southcoast Luna, hester
      Israel wants to convince the world that because of their fear of annihilation, and that because they have went through a supposed genocidal holocost, that they and they alone have the right to genocide any race of people they so choose.

      I wanted to post this comment all in one, but received error report: { bad-form-key

      by from the sideline on Fri Jul 18, 2014 at 07:41:25 PM EDT

    3. Anecdotal evidence would suggest that the trend over there, as in all progressive-left venues, is anti-Zionist.

      The number of pro-Israel diaries to anti-Israel diaries must be, at least, ten to one and the general presumption within those diaries is that the Jews of the Middle East are vicious barbarians that must be opposed while the Arabs are the innocent, indigenous population that must be supported.

      These assumptions have virtually nothing to do with either history or facts on the ground.

      They are mainly a product of political ideology that reinforces itself over time so that you eventually end up with someone like, for example, Lefty Coaster, who considers the Jews of Israel to be, essentially, evil.

  5. This comment has been removed by the author.

    1. What an exaggeration. Not to mention that you disparage people that stand up for Israel and act as if you are on the side of the angels.

      Perhaps if you seemed more cognizant about humanitarian law in your comments, rather than invariable cast Israel and its supporters as on the side of the devil, there would be reason to pay more attention.

      Your lectures on morals fall flat and, excuse me, but your farts do not smell like roses.

    2. This comment has been removed by the author.

    3. Because nothing demonstrates bravery and heroism like foul-mouthed typing about how tough one is under a pseudonym on the internet...

    4. Missed that comment. Thanks for showing EVERYTHING I siad.

    5. I'm assuming that was Hercules the Internet Clown's devastating parting shot...

    6. Perhaps. I was enjoying the lessons of "morality" provided by this person.

  6. This comment has been removed by the author.

    1. At least be honest. I NEVER said such a thing and challenge you to offer proof.

      You come here professing the moral schtick. From what I see, your morals are perverted. Not to mention your demonization of people you do not agree with and the way you call out bigots, as you have above.

      Like I said, you seem to know zilch about humanitarian law. If you knew even a fraction, you would see that Israel is the best when it comes to protecting civilians.

      As one said yesterday, Hamas does not have the capability to kill thousands of civilians, but the intention to do so. Israel has the capability to kill thousands of civilians, but does not have the intention.

    2. This comment has been removed by the author.

    3. I said explicitly that I never made a comment that I would have no problem "if all Palestinians were removed from the West Bank and Gaza Strip." You do like to throw allegations, however.

      Once again, prove it!

      Talk about a myopic world of your own construct, it appears that you have nothing better to do than project your hate on to others. That is why I call you a moral hypocrite.

      To say that you see the moral and ethical failings of Hamas, let alone it's partner Fatah, is laughable.

      I see plenty of failings of Israel, but in this case, the case of observance of humanitarian law, which you seem clueless about, there is no question that it is the best, and Hamas is the worst, except perhaps for ISIS or the gents at Boko Haram.

    4. This comment has been removed by the author.

    5. This is the best response you can offer?

      I assure you, I have forgotten more of it than you appear to have ever known.

      I actually wonder of you even know what it is.

    6. I will add, ANYTIME you want to have a discussion on the substance of humanitarian law, just say the word.

  7. I want to thank Nagaura for joining us and I am exceedingly sorry that she decided to eliminate her comments. I very much hoped that we could have a conversation with her, or those of like mind, in a civil manner going forward.

    Nagaura, before she deleted them, had 5 specific allegations against Jewish people.

    These were:

    1) our alleged "complete dehumanization of the Palestinians"

    2) our alleged "blind agreement with the policies of the government of Israel"

    3) the alleged claim that we consider "any disagreement with said policies as anti semitic"

    4) our alleged acceptance that "israeli citizens have certain rights but those of Arab descent do not"

    5) the claim that the "government or its military never takes any responsibility for its actions which result in the deaths of civilians", in which she uses as evidence 4 Palestine boys killed on a beach in Gaza city.

    What I want to do is address each of these individually, but I also want to discuss the entire process.

    What I often say is that "they attack and we defend" and this is a perfectly suitable example of the kind of thing that I am talking about. In this case, given the current necessary action in Gaza, Nagaura attacks the Jewish people as monsters and therefore we tend to defend ourselves as not-monsters.

    They attack and we defend.

    The very dynamic of the conversation needs to change.

    Perhaps we need to be on the offensive. It's not really within Jewish culture to behave in such a manner, but I think that it might be necessary.

    If we want to take the fight to the bastards the very first thing to do is acknowledge the vicious, homophobic, anti-Semitic, anti-Christian, and misogynistic nature of political Islam and organizations like the Muslim Brotherhood that were supported by president Barack Obama.

    1. The deletions speak volumes about one that could hurl invective, but could not withstand the response.

      Similar to aggression and the response to aggression.

      It was apparent from the beginning. The aggressive comments were just a projection of a rage that we know only too well, based on false assumptions and ignorance, along with an inability to have civil discourse or an open mind.

    2. What I need to learn how to do, School, is respond to hatred in a non-hateful way.

      Ultimately, I think that we could have a conversation with Nagaura.

    3. Don't think so. One chooses whether or not to engage in a fair manner, and this individual made the choice to impugn and come off holier than thou, not indicative of one interested in conversation.

      Attempts to converse with close-minded people that use disparagement is a waste of finite energy, and something will always arise to prevent actual dialogue. Such people are never satisfied.

    4. I think that I will address her points, anyway.

      I captured them above and they come from her first comment under this piece.

      There is no big hurry, but I am sorry that she ran away.

    5. A lot like many who talk a big game. They run when confronted.

      Are you sure this runner is a woman?

    6. And as they noted, Mike, beware!

      Because if you continue to bother them, they might just reach right through the screen and beat you up!

      (Yeah, this loser deserves nothing other than being made much fun of...)

  8. Taking them on this way can be fun at times...

    1. I suppose, Jay.

      But not often.

    2. Using one my many web pseuds, I went to that thread and uprated nearly all your comments, and added a few of my own, one of which was hide-rated with an admin warning:

      "A comment you made was hidden by the community for being outside of site rules."

      And what was this horrible comment? This one:

      "How many sources do you need to prove 2 + 2 = 4?"

      Sensitive lot, aren't they?

      So I guess they don't want any back talk out of the joos.

    3. Thanks, brother.

      Yeah, I stopped giving a fuck about ten comments into that diary, and though I didn't completely let loose (I should have!), I still ended up getting kicked off that site for my efforts. Oh, well.

      My only regret is that I held back more than I should have!