The I-P Status Quo Will Continue

There's really no way around it.

The status quo will continue because the Arabs have yet to end their war against the Jews. And, indeed, why should they give up on it when they've done such a good job over the decades encouraging the Palestinians to be their surrogate fighters?

The war goes on because the Palestinians refuse to make peace and the Arabs, for the most part, refuse to settle them on Arab land. The reason that Palestinians refuse to make peace is because they are convinced that Haifa and Tel Aviv and Beersheba belong to them. They do not accept Jewish sovereignty on Jewish land and, indeed, refuse to accept Jewish land as anything but their own.

So, yes, the status quo will continue.

Nonetheless, we constantly hear that the status quo is untenable.

Is it?

One of the things that I very much enjoy about having freed myself from political partisanship is that I am able to question political dogma that takes on the character of religious certitude. In other words, if everybody knows something to be true, such as that "the status quo is untenable," there's an excellent chance that the notion is false.

It seems to me that the status quo is very tenable. The status quo in terms of I-P is that the western bank of the Jordan River remains disputed territory. That is the status quo. This is a situation in which Jews and Arabs share that land, but the Jews remain citizens of Israel and the Arabs are, for the most part, under the sovereignty of Fatah, although subject to, in certain places, Israeli checkpoints as required for Israeli security.

Is the continuation of this untenable? Not at all. We've had varying degrees of something quite like this since 1967. It's been 44 years, so why is it suddenly no longer tenable? Of course, it is tenable. This can go on for decade upon decade upon decade. It can go on and on and on well into the future. The Israelis will thrive and build a great country, and continue to rack-up all those Nobel prizes, while the Palestinians of the western bank of the Jordan River, and those who live in Gaza, continue to incite hatred and shoot rockets and blow up their kids in an effort to murder Jewish kids.

This can go on and on and on.

It can, because it has.

Do I prefer it? No.

What I would prefer to see are the Palestinians at last agreeing to the two-state solution and then settling in to build a decent life for themselves and their kids. Unfortunately, this is not what they want. It is what most Israeli Jews want, that much is certain, however there is little to indicate that this is what the Palestinians want.

What they clearly want is victory over the Jews.

For fourteen hundred years the Arabs ruled over us in the Middle East.  We were second class citizens and third class citizens, depending upon just where and when.  We had to pay a special tax, had no say in government, and had no means of self defense.

And that is precisely what they will not get, yet again, any time soon.

And the thing of it is, so many people, so many liberals, Jews and non-Jews, think that Israel can solve this problem by doing this, that, or the other. If only the Jews would comply with Arab racism and have a civil war with itself by trying to shove 500,000 of our brothers and sisters off that land, then there would be peace.

What horrific nonsense.

The Jewish Left continues to delude itself that Israel is the reason why there is no peace in this conflict. The reason for that is Jewish Stockholm Syndrome and the reason behind Jewish Stockholm Syndrome is that it gives one a sense of some control over circumstances. That's the basis of it. If we can only convince our fellow Jews to stand on their heads while playing the kazoo, then it means that we have the power to fix the situation.

But, we don't.

That's the truth.

We cannot have peace if they will not ever be peaceful. We cannot have peace if they always and forever refuse to accept peace through a negotiated settlement. So long as they continue to be willing to sacrifice their own children on the altar of Jew Hatred, then there can be no peace.

The rest of the Arab world doesn't care if Palestinians kill themselves in their efforts to kill Jews, for if they did, they would have offered those Palestinians citizenship in Lebanon and Syria and Egypt, but they refuse to do that. The obvious reason that the Arab states refuse to relieve the Palestinians of refugee status is because they want the Palestinians to be right where they are, on the front line in their holy war, their Jihad, against the Jews.

I do not like it any more than do you, but we have no choice.

Israel, under Netanyahu, yet again called for negotiations without preconditions and the Palestinians, with some encouragement from Barack Obama, refused.

This means that the status quo continues.

Most progressive Jews will never acknowledge the obvious.  I feel bad for them because they earnestly want a resolution and therefore are constantly trying to negotiate with the other side.

And, yet, as we see throughout the Left political blogosphere, the other side, that is non-Jewish progressives who despise Israel, spit on Jewish liberals and constantly drag our characters through the muck.

What a shame.

It's one of the reasons that I have said my goodbyes to the Left.

Jews Leaving the Democratic Party and the Progressive Left

I come out of the Democratic Party and the progressive-left, but I am done with it.

The simple truth is that Jews should abandon the Democratic Party and the progressive movement for the obvious reason that these people are not our friends and do not represent our interests.  Quite the contrary.

Daily Kos's MiddleClassTraitors wrote a piece, today, asking how it is that conservative Jews are willing to vote against their own economic class interests in favor of Republicans who, he suggests, pay lip-service to support for Israel.

The truth is that conservatives and Republicans support Jewish well-being while "progressives" simply do not.

Whether or not Republicans are better, materially, for the American middle class than are Democrats is a question that I will leave aside, but what I argue is that because the progressive-left and, hence, the Democratic Party have become the political home for anti-Semitic anti-Zionists some Jews are leaving that party and that movement, including me.

Whether it is Daily Kos, or the Huffington Post, or the UK Guardian, the western progressive-left is where anti-Zionism mainly lives. These are progressives providing venues for the spread of hatred toward the Jewish state. They will tell you, of course, that they criticize Israel out of a concern for human rights.

This is false.

The BDS campaign, which uses these venues, is not about "criticism" but about delegitimization. Most anti-Zionists virtually never criticize Israel. They defame it. Furthermore, the very last thing in this world the progressive-left cares about is "human rights." If they cared about human rights or social justice they would concentrate on places in the world that are human rights disasters, such as the Congo or Darfur, but they do not.

Instead, on a daily basis, they pick on, defame, demean, and dehumanize the one, sole, lone Jewish state, even as they justify Jihadi violence against innocent civilians.

It is, in fact, one of the most profound and perverse historical developments that contemporary anti-Semitism actually marches under the banner of human rights. In every generation they have reason to tell one another that the Jews are bad and it always leads to, at least, some level of violence against us. Sometimes it's not so bad and sometimes it is horrific. We do not know where we are heading, just yet.

What we do know is that the rough beast has made a home for itself in the Democratic Party.

{Progressives should be very proud.}

This is MiddleClassTraitor's eminently reasonable response under the name jgorran:

I happen to be the author of the post you referred to. Your background seems very, very familiar. I agree that Israeli bashing has been a favorite past time of the far-left extreme progressives and some of the not so far left. I simply don't buy that republicans who seem to pander to Jewish voters by trying to "out Jew a Jew" by simply mouthing the most extreme statements of support that cost them nothing, should get one's vote. I don't buy that the democratic political establishment is out to destroy Israel. When I see people like Rep. Allen West, Rep. 19th FL advocate for a biblical "greater Israel", I can only assume that he cares more for getting Jewish voters than he does for what happens to Israel.

June 1, 2011 3:13 PM

I certainly agree that the Democratic political establishment is not out to destroy Israel. MiddleClassTraitors and I agree on this. My issue is not so much with the Democratic political establishment as it is with the base of the Democratic Party and the progressive-movement because they provide venues for anti-Zionism and the shrouded anti-Semitism within anti-Zionism.

This is the answer that I have given to MiddleClassTraitor's question. I cannot really speak for conservative Jews or Republican Jews because I am neither. No conservative would consider me a conservative on the issues.

But one thing that I know for sure, as the anti-Zionism and Israel Hate moves from the fringes to the center in Democratic Party circles you will see, more and more, Jewish liberals running for the hills.

We are NOT going to support people who are either actively working to undermine our collective well-being or who are indifferent to the presence, in the Democratic Party or the progressive-left, of those who are.

That is my position and it is a more than reasonable position for anyone who cares about Israel to take.

Liberals can whistle pass the graveyard all they like, but there is a big, big problem with the Democratic Party and the progressive-movement and that problem has a name: anti-Zionism.

(Ask citizen53, he'll tell ya.)

I do not make this stuff up.

I just report the news.

Why I am Not a Zionist

In the discussion around the ongoing Arab-Israel conflict there are, depending on one's perspective, good people and bad people. If one is an anti-Semitic anti-Zionist the bad people are called "Zionists." These Zionists are thought to be an unusually horrid breed of people who hold nefarious intent toward Arabs and bolster a particularly extreme, if not fascistic, form of ethnic nationalism.

The funny thing is, and what no one ever says, is that Zionism, as a political movement, is over with. It's done. What Zionism really was, of course, was the movement for Jewish national liberation and it fulfilled itself in May of 1948 when Israel was recognized by the UN as a state. It should be noted, by the way, that the UN did not create Israel. People often say this, but it is not true. Israel was not created by well-meaning pencil pushers in the UN, but by Jewish people (and some non-Jewish people) on the ground.

Between the end of the 19th century and 1948, hundreds of thousands of Jews built that country from nothing. It was swampland and desert, but they worked that land. They grew the crops and developed the farms and created the infrastructure, political and material, necessary for a state. All that the UN did was recognize a condition that already existed, the condition of Jewish statehood.

Those people were Zionists. That is, those people, those Jewish farmers and Jewish laborers and Jewish politicians, those people were Zionists. They dreamed of creating a national homeland for the Jewish people on historically Jewish land and went about doing precisely that.

I am not a Zionist because I was born too late to have anything to do with the Zionist project of building a state. By the time that I came around the state was already built. The truth of the matter is that most Jews who care about Israel do not necessarily think of themselves as Zionists. When I was growing up, in an American middle class home wherein we supported the Jewish state, we almost never even used that word.

I do not recall my folks, or their friends, ever referring to themselves as Zionists. We were just American Jews who supported Israel. We did not require a separate name for ourselves any more than American Italians who happen to like Italy get some specific name or Chinese Americans who care about China have some separate and specific name for themselves.

More and more the word "Zionism" is nothing but an epithet spit at Jews who happen to be supportive of Israel. That's what Zionism really is today. It is the word that our enemies use to isolate us and separate us out from other people. It is an identifying mark at this point. It is the yellow star, and in the mouths of hate-filled anti-Zionist progressives, a stigma.

Zionists are the category of people whom it is OK to hate. Where it was, once upon a time, socially acceptable to hate Jews that is no longer the case among people who consider themselves contemporary-left anti-racists.

Progressives do not hate Jews because that would be racist.

Instead the socially acceptable category of people to hate is not Jews, but Zionists. You cannot openly hate on Jews in polite society. (Is that still the case?) But you can hate on Zionists. And just because the vast majority of Jews happen to be Zionists represents no reason not to despise Zionists because these insidious people are promoting... or so they never tire of telling us... a truly virulent form of racist imperialism and colonialism resulting in the ethnic cleansing and oppression of those icons of pure victim-hood, the "Palestinian" people.

That is what Zionism means in the mouths of the anti-Zionist progressive-left.

The oppressor.

The Jew as oppressor.

That is what they mean when they call us Zionists.

Nobody ever talks about it, but anyone who follows the never-ending conflict cannot possibly miss this. It is a fundamental and central part of the discussion. They have conjured up an entire class of evil people, Zionists, and anyone who defends Israel from their never-ending defamation becomes one of these insidious beings.

And this is why anti-Zionism represents the new anti-Semitism.

And what a shame that this time around it is coming at us from the Left.

Shame. Shame. Shame.

{Sad, really.}

Racist Kossacks Blame AIPAC, Always (Updated)

The vile racists over at Daily Kos are blaming the Jews for Obama's political blunder with the Republicans.

This is just so typical of Nazis. Barack Obama said nothing wrong when he suggested that Israel's final borders should be based on the '67 lines. Of course, they should be based on the '67 lines. They need not, and should not, conform directly to those lines, but there should be land swaps and the major settlements near the so-called "green line" should be incorporated into Israel.

The status of Jerusalem needs to be negotiated, but I personally favor maintaining the city's unity.

In any case, the speeches recently given by Barack Obama and Benjamin Netanyahu reveal that the two gentlemen are mainly on the same page. The only people screeching at them are those who wish to keep the conflict alive and/or those who wish to make political hay out of the matter. On the Right there are those who suggest that Obama wants Israel to go directly back to the "Auschwitz Lines" of 1967, which is not what Obama has suggested.

These are Republicans, like Orrin Hatch, trying to make some political hay.

However, on the Left there are Nazis who want to see the conflict deepen and who blame the Jews for the Republican response to Obama.

On Daily Kos, Geekesque has a "diary" blaming AIPAC. Of course, they blame AIPAC.  They always blame AIPAC.  Progressive-left Nazis despise pretty much all Jewish groups with the exception of anti-Zionist Jewish organizations, such as Jewish Voice for Peace, and cannot fathom that American politicians support Israel not because of AIPAC arm-twisting, but because their constituency is largely supportive of Israel and simply do not share progressive anti-Zionist hatred of all things Jewish.

In Senate Democrats Eager to Pass "Permanent Occupation" Resolution, Geekesque tells us the following:

The Hill has the depressing story.

Senate Democrats are expected to support a resolution intended as a rebuff to President Obama’s call for basing Middle East peace talks on the 1967 Israeli-Palestinian borders.

It would be a rare rebuke of the president by the upper chamber and a sign that Democrats are worried about the impact of last week’s speech on the U.S.-Israel relationship and pro-Israel constituents.

Translation: AIPAC & Co are not pleased.

Thanks for the translation Mister Nazi Guy.

Just because Orrin Hatch is trying to make some political hay out of Obama's speech, and just because many Democrats do, in fact, support Israel, this does not mean that the evil and insidious AIPAC is slithering behind things.

He doesn't even bother to provide even a smidgen of evidence. He just knows, somehow, that the evil Jews are behind this... whatever this is, exactly.

It's such a classic racist canard, the idea that American politicians only support Israel because of AIPAC... the Evil and Horrendous AIPAC... behind the scenes, pulling the strings, controlling American foreign policy and media, an octopus with many arms and stabbing the American public in the back with more than one.

This is why the Nazis slaughtered the Jews, because they just knew that we were manipulating things to the detriment of the "good people."

This is what Geekesque is telling the world.

UPDATE:

In the comments Geekesque says the following:

It was a mistake. (4+ / 0-)

Obama thinks it's his responsibility to show leadership and broker a peace deal.

Honestly, he should just get out of the way. Israel's long-term fate is really none of our concern.

"[R]ather high-minded, if not a bit self-referential"--The Washington Post.

by Geekesque on Wed May 25, 2011 at 07:44:43 AM PDT

Exactly!

The fate of the Jewish people is not your concern.

This is all that I have been saying. The progressive-left, as a group, is not the least little bit concerned about the fate of the Jewish people. If and when the time comes, again, we cannot count on them.

They tell us so, directly.

We need to believe them when they tell us that they do not care.

They do not care about Gays in the Middle East. They do not care about women in the Middle East. And they most certainly do not care about Jews in the Middle East.

We need to understand that.

We need to understand that, as a movement, the progressive-left has entirely given up on the notion of universal human rights. Instead they are highly selective about just whose "human rights" they wish to champion and while they may champion Palestinian human rights, they certainly do not care about our human rights.

When they see us dead, they'll blame us for it, just as they blamed the Fogels for the Radical Jihadi violence that saw the near beheading of a 3 month old baby girl.

Mark my words.

Second Update:

Geekesque in same diary:

Negotiations will not produce a Palestinian (0+ / 0-)
state.

Only the entire rest of the planet shoving it down Israel's throat will.

"[R]ather high-minded, if not a bit self-referential"--The Washington Post.

by Geekesque on Wed May 25, 2011 at 11:27:50 AM PDT

Notice the intense Nazi-like hostility.

Furthermore, of course, he totally ignores the fact that the Palestinians have refused every single offer for statehood and won't even negotiate the question with Israel.

Yet, against all rationality and human decency, many, many people on the progressive-left, like Geekesque, think that it's Israel's fault that the Palestinians do not have a state.

The progressive-left has clearly become the ideological home of contemporary Nazism and in the Long Arab War Against the Jews, they have chosen to side against us.

At least during the Holocaust the Left was indifferent. Now they are, many of them, actually on the other side.

An Open Letter to My Fellow Liberal Jews

Hiya guys,

Karmafish here.

I thought that I would drop by to have a little chit-chat.

As you may, or may not, be aware, we have a small problem on our hands. The problem is that as liberals, or as progressives, whatever you want to say, we are part of a movement that goes back quite a long ways in the United States, at least to abolitionism, but that now... if I may be blunt... seems to be in direct opposition to the well-being of the Jewish people.

The progressive movement in the United States started with abolitionism, but then merged into the early labor movement of the late 19th century. It's the same movement that influenced Teddy Roosevelt to sign legislation regulating the cleanliness of our food. It's the same movement that inclined Franklin Roosevelt to propose New Deal legislation. It's also the same movement that emerged as the New Left in the 1960s.

I wasn't really there then, but the anti-war movement, second wave feminism, environmentalism, Gay and Lesbian rights, not to mention the Civil Rights Movement, of course, were all important parts of our political movement... as was / is the counterculture.

And, for as long as I've had political consciousness... up until now, anyway... it was my movement, too.  I am too young to have opposed the Vietnam War, but I opposed it anyway.  I favor a woman's right to choose and I favor the regulation of polluting industries and I oppose the death penalty and I marched against the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan.

{And on and on and on... blah, blah, blah.}

The thing of it is, tho... what we must acknowledge... what we must face... is that the progressive movement has now, in the west, become the home of a sub-movement that has directly targeted the Jews. I know that it's very inconvenient to face this fact, and I do not like it any more than you do, but it is unquestionably the truth. The progressive-left has become the home of anti-Zionism. Anti-Zionism is a movement that seeks to rob Jews of self-determination and self-defense via BDS, boycott, divestment, and sanctions.

The Jewish state is the only country on the planet wherein western progressives ponder whether or not they should allow it to continue or whether they should actively work to see its demise. You know those people on the Left calling for BDS? What they want is to see Israel eliminated as a Jewish state. That's what BDS is about. That's the whole point of anti-Zionism.

Now, I understand that the BDS activists and anti-Zionists only make up a small percentage of the liberal-left.   I know.   I am not saying anything else.

BUT...

But we only make up a small percentage of the liberal-left, now don't we? I mean, Jews only represent 2 percent of the American population and about .02 percent of the world population. We are a tiny minority. Sure, we punch well above our weight, but that's not the point. The point is that the progressive-left as a movement is becoming more and more comfortable with expressions of hatred toward the Jewish state and this hatred cannot help but slop onto us.

There are people who would say, "Oh, well, Karmafish is always conflating Israel with the Jews. The two are not the same. Criticism of Israel is in no way meant to reflect poorly on the Jewish people as a whole."

Yes.  How nice of them to spare us.

Of course, it's nonsense and the sooner that we recognize this nonsense as nonsense the sooner we can prepare to defend ourselves. You know as well as I, or you certainly should, that these attacks on Israel throughout the progressive-left and on political blogs like Daily Kos, the Huffington Post, and the UK Guardian, among many other places, do not represent criticism, but defamation.  And this is a defamation that does not only reflect on Israel and that does not only hold consequences for Israel, but reflects on, and holds serious consequences for, the Jews as a whole.

When these people, for example, insist that Israel is an "apartheid state," what they are saying is that Israel must be eliminated. That's not criticism. What it is is nothing less than a call for the genocide of the Jews.

You get that, right?

Anti-Zionism means the single state solution and the single state solution means nothing less than genocide and war if it is to be achieved.

This means that we are actually supporting a movement, the progressive movement, our long-time political home, in which it is now politically acceptable to call for our genocide, so long as the language is the language of anti-Zionism, rather than that of anti-Semitism. The progressive-left thinks of itself as anti-racist and is, therefore, just as opposed to anti-Semitism as it is to any other form of racism or sexism or bigotry, in general.

So it is in theory, anyways.  In practice... not so much.

I just broke off a number of on-line friendships that did, in fact, mean something to me. I did not want to do so, but I do not see where I had any choice. I had been associated with a particular progressive political blog and was friends with the site-owner. Unfortunately, she chose to associate herself with another political blog that features BDS and the owner of that blog has, in the past, said some spectacularly nasty things about Jews.

So, what am I supposed to do? I do not even blame the nice lady whose blog I will no longer associate myself with. It's not really her fault. Without quite realizing it, I think, she put herself into the position of having to choose between a helpful political alliance and the well-being of the Jewish people. She chose the political alliance. I have no doubt that when she did so the very last thing on her mind was the Jewish people, for chrissake, but that's kinda beside the point.

The point is that we are all of us, more and more, being put into precisely this position. We can associate with a political movement that is comfortable with BDS and anti-Zionism or we can refuse to associate with that political movement.

In effect, the progressive-movement, as a group, as a whole, is forcing us to choose between the movement, a movement that we have been integral to for a very long time, and ourselves.

I have chosen to be in opposition to the movement.

Anyway, I imagine that many of you do not share my concern on the matter.

I would, however, ask that you consider the case and consider the following question.

Do we, or do we not, wish to associate ourselves with a political movement that is also a home to anti-Zionists?

I think that it is a vital question and one that we have no choice but to consider.  To my mind, at least, associating with anti-Zionists is not a whole lot different from associating with Nazis.

And just as the Nazis justified violence against Jews on the grounds that the Jews did bad stuff to the Germans... Hitler thought that we were mean to the Germans... it still blows my mind... so anti-Zionists justify violence against Jews on the grounds that Israelis do bad stuff to the Palestinians.

In every generation they tell themselves that they have good reason to target us, even in this one, which is why they could care less about the thousands upon thousands of Qassams and Katyushas that have landed in southern Israel in recent years.

And so, my fellow liberal Jews, I request that you give the issue further consideration.

Karmafish

An Oppressed People Enamored of Their Own Oppression

It's odd but it seems that the best thing that the Palestinians have going for themselves is their own oppression. It's as if they love their victim status. God knows that they squeeze it for every drop that it is worth.

What I fail to understand, though, and what is one of the main themes of this blog, is just why the Palestinians do not accept a state for themselves in peace next to the Jewish one? I mean, really, how oppressed can a people be if they absolutely refuse to give up that oppression unless all their demands are met?

It's very strange, actually.

On the one hand we are told that the Palestinians are occupied and oppressed and, yet, somehow, no offer of statehood, of autonomy, of self-determination, of freedom and independence, has ever been good enough. In 1937 they turned this down because it wasn't good enough:



And from that day to this the Palestinians have refused any deal in which they would gain autonomy in a state next to Israel. No offer has ever been good enough.

There has to come a point where people begin to realize that the Palestinians simply do not want a state for themselves in peace next to Israel. If that was their national aspiration they could have accepted any one of the numerous offers for statehood that were put forth by Israel, by England, or by the United Nations.

There has to come a point where people begin to realize that if the Palestinians wanted a state for themselves in peace next to the Jewish state that they would have demanded such a state prior to 1967, but they did not. At no point during the Jordanian occupation of the western bank of the Jordan did the Arabs in that region... they did not yet refer to themselves as "Palestinians"... demand a state for themselves.

I wonder why they did not?  Could it be because Palestinian statehood in peace next to Israel does not represent Palestinian aspirations?

I suspect that this is true!

Oh my goodness!

What do we do now???

Well, if you are a progressive Jew what you do is pretend that the last 90 years of Palestinian rejectionism never happened and you continue to try to explain yourself and negotiate terms. They keep telling you "no," and what horrible human beings you are (might as well be the children of apes and pigs), and you keep trying to negotiate. They spit in your face and you keep begging them to accept a state for themselves next to Israel.

{By the way, as an aside, just think of the work that so many Jews could be doing for the progressive movement and the Democratic party if we were not so distracted by the need to defend ourselves against anti-Zionist aggression within progressive ranks.  It's a terrible waste, really, but I do not see where we are being given any choice.}

The reason that the Jews keep begging the Palestinians to accept a state for themselves in peace next to Israel is because we are effectively being held hostage to Arab insistence on our own suicide via the alleged Palestinian "right of return."  Why the heck else would we even care?  The very reason that I bother to write this blog is because as a Jew I recognize that the Arabs absolutely refuse to allow Jewish normalization within the community of nations and that this is harming us as a people.

The problem, obviously, is that they do not want a state for themselves next to Israel and they do not want a non-Muslim state on land that was formerly part of Dar al Islam. What they want, what they've always told us that they want, is Arab sovereignty over the entire region. They simply do not recognize Jewish rights to autonomy, self-determination, and self-defense, and they have been very candid about that from the 1920s onward.

This represents the entire basis of the Long Arab War against the Jews, yet my fellow liberal Jews simply will not recognize it. It's amazing, actually. Liberal Jews simply will not take "no" for an answer and they continue to pretend that the Second Intifada never happened. They absolutely refuse to recognize that the lesson of the Second Intifada, in the early part of the last decade... in which traumatized Israelis experienced the equivalent of a 9/11 every two weeks, or so, for around three years... is that the Palestinians do not want a negotiated settlement.

That is not what they want.

When will you guys wake the fuck up and hear what they are telling you?

When will you recognize that the progressive movement is not your friend and does not represent your interests?  There are many perfectly fine and decent people within the movement, but the movement as a whole is entirely uninterested in the well-being of the Jewish people.  It has to be understood that the progressive movement has given up on the notion of universal human rights, in favor of the multicultural ideal and a repugnant moral relativism, and has thus abandoned Gays, women, and Jews in the Middle East.

We have to, furthermore, read and understand what Palestinian advocates on the Left are saying. Those of you who read Daily Kos need to listen to unspeakable and soysauce and sortalikenathan and simone and the firebadtree person. They are speaking very clearly. I have no problem understanding their message. What they are telling you is this:

Go fuck yourselves.

And why shouldn't that be their message? They do not care about us. They have no interest in the well-being of the Jewish people any more than does your average western progressive. What they want is what the Arabs have always wanted. However much they may dress up their arguments in the language of human rights in order to appeal to a naive western audience, what they want is the elimination of Israel as a Jewish state. And it does not matter to them how many of us die in the process of getting there.

If they wanted peace with a Palestinian state next to the Jewish one then they would join Team Shalom, but they have not. Adalah does not want peace with a Palestinian state next to the Jewish state. If that was what they wanted, then they would tell you that. They do not tell you that, because, like the Palestinians, themselves, that is not what they want.

Is it really this difficult to understand?