You are currently browsing the monthly archive for April 2010.
The drip drip demonization of the Jewish state in “Comment is Free” both above the line and below the line has resulted to some extent in the dirtying of the word “Zionism”, the national self-determination movement of the Jewish people. The post below, cross-posted from the Elder of Ziyon blog, is an antidote to the hatred and extremism that characterizes the anti-Israel bigotry of “Comment is Free”.
I wrote the original essay around 2002 and I have been modifying it since then. Here is this year’s edition:
Every year, the State of Israel seems to be up against yet another unsolvable crisis. Whether it is war against terrible odds, a wave of terror attacks, a new feeling of isolation as friends seem to turn hostile, or the threat of nuclear-armed enemies, there are always new challenges that she faces – sometimes simultaneously.Yet, here she is, 62 years old and more beautiful than she was at birth.
In prayers every morning Jews say a phrase praising G-d, describing Him as המחדש בכל יום תמיד מעשה בראשית – He who continually renews the act of Creation. In other words, the Jewish concept of G-d has him in an active role keeping the universe running, and as such it is appropriate to praise Him.
It is a little hard to conceptualize this idea, that the very laws of physics, of the world turning and revolving around the sun is not automatic, but only occurs due to the constant will of G-d. But perhaps it is easier to understand this phrase if we apply it to the modern state of Israel.
Every single day that the Jewish state continues to exist cannot be explained adequately with historical or social or military reasons. Which means that we are witnessing a miracle every day.
The most recent years have been very hard for Zionists, as well as for religious Zionists. Yet when we step back and look at the big picture, Israel remains something to be very proud of.
Yes, I am a Zionist and I am proud of it.
h/t Dry Bones Blog
Today Israel celebrates its 62nd birthday. We’d like to wish our Israeli readers a Chag Sameach on the occasion of Yom Ha’atzmaut.
As we celebrate the miracle of the Jewish state its worth reflecting on the wise words of Danny Ayalon, Deputy Foreign Minister of Israel:
HAVING FAILED on so many occasions, our enemies have lately discovered a new way to attack us. This is through the current delegitimization campaign and so-called “lawfare” and may prove to be our toughest battle yet. Our enemies know they have distinct advantages that are difficult to contend with. They have an automatic majority in international institutions and have created an orchestrated system to tar the Jewish state as akin to the Nazis or the racist apartheid regime. They prevent us from speaking on campuses or having our voice heard in forums, and deny us freedom of speech because they know that if our voice is heard our enemies’ flawed narrative will collapse.
Although few know it or report on it, the Organization of Islamic Conference clearly stated on a number of occasions that it initiated the Goldstone Commission. How many of those who scream about Israeli war crimes know they are the mouthpiece of autocratic regimes? How many of those who read about the attempted arrest of Israeli officials in Europe realize that these attempts are initiated, supported and funded by those in our region who will not allow a woman to vote and kill or oppress their own people?
However, the verbal terrorism and attacks on our legitimacy will fail just as every other tactic before it. Nevertheless, to win this battle we must reinforce education about our history and purpose. We need to further the understanding of our historical, religious, moral and legal rights. Too few of our people understand that our modern legal rights are not based on history, religion or the Holocaust, as important as each of these is, but because the international community came together in 1920 as rarely seen before and conferred national rights in Eretz Yisrael to the Jewish people.
This is a guest post by AKUS
Some people just cannot get a break.
Consider, for example, the Guardian’s one time golden boy, Seth Freedman.
For a couple or three years he reliably churned out one anti-Israeli article after another. There wasn’t a taxi-driver, pizza vendor or orthodox Jew, real or imaginary, he couldn’t or wouldn’t cite as examples of Israeli intransigence. Not a celebration could be held in Israel without him pointing out that the glass, apparently half-full to the Jewish Israelis, was really three quarters empty when viewed from the Guardian’s website. Not a charitable effort could be carried out (except by a Freedman-approved NGO) without demonstrating that this was, in fact, yet another example of Israel’s futile attempt to cover up its transgressions against its Arab minority or Arab neighbors.
For example, when Israel sent the best field hospital to Haiti, we got a charming piece from Freedman headlined Israel’s double standards over Haiti . The subeditors reliably added the necessary extra drop of poison: “The Israeli relief effort in Haiti is laudable, but it underlines the state’s indifference to those suffering on its own doorstep”.
In one paragraph in the article Freedman ignores almost 100 years of attacks by Arabs against their Jewish neighbors and the Jewish State including, recently, 8,000 rockets from Gaza, to make sure we understand that this and other humanitarian efforts do not let Israel off the hook:
However, for all that Israel’s sterling work overseas deserves to be praised, it highlights the lack of compassion shown by the country’s leaders to those suffering on its own doorstep. Israel’s insistence on doing next to nothing to alleviate the suffering in Gaza while rushing to Haiti’s aid exposes just how far they are prepared to stray from the religious teachings to which they claim to adhere. Likewise, when Zionist movements such as Bnei Akiva trumpet the achievements of Israel’s relief teams as representative of the entire Jewish people, they inadvertently tar all Jews with the same brush when Israel’s frequent violations of international law are brought to light.
This is the sort of red meat the Guardian is looking for, and why those supporting Israel find the Guardian (and Freedman) so biased and basically disgusting. This is the contract that Freedman is supposed to deliver against.
But sometimes something funny happens – Freedman seems to let slip that he actually sees a glimmer of goodness in the evil country he has, for reasons I cannot comprehend, decided to call his own. You have to also understand that although Freedman has, apparently, no background in economics, his “training” as a stockbroker in London in the Internet bubble has in his own mind qualified him to comment on economic matters. So, on April 12, 2010, we got: Israel’s peace dividend.
I happen to be a big Gil Scott Heron fan so when I heard that he was going to debut in Tel Aviv nothing could please me more than the knowledge that the godfather of hip-hop would be doing his thing in the Holy Land.
Not everyone however shares my joy.
In the Guardian’s coverage of Gil Scott Heron’s upcoming performance in the South Bank Centre in London, the accompanying thread was completely hijacked by anti-Jewish BDS supporters (some of whom included the likes of Theobald Jews such as Yael Oren Kahn (a/k/a No2Genocide) of the Islington Friends of Yibna and Ruth Tenne of Jews for Justice for Palestinians).
Below are a selection of undeleted comments from the thread each and every one of which is off topic.
Quite a few CiF commentators appear to be graduates of the Henry Ford School of History, at least when it comes to one specific area of the world. Carlo Strenger’s April 15th article on CiF prompted some comments which are quite incredible, either for their ignorance, their revisionism or their plain idiocy. Take a look at some of these choice examples, and if you happen to be a history teacher, have the tissues to hand.
15 Apr 2010, 10:21AM
The Old City of Jerusalem is Palestinian; Christian and Muslim Palestinian. Walk through the streets and observe.
Apart from a few Zionist fortresses with armed guards, a small Jewish quarter (eighth, more like) and Orthodox worshippers hurrying through from the Western Wall to the Damascus Gate (unmolested, as it happens, unlike Muslim worshippers in Hebron)…..Now tell me; what are Israel’s long-term plans for these people? They can’t even be expelled to Silwa n now.
15 Apr 2010, 10:29AM
Yanpol
I’m not sure why Israeli Jews would want to worship in the mosque….but it is Israel who bans them. Perhaps the extremists threaten the Israeli state as much as the lives of Palestinians?
The gates are controlled by armed Israelis; Israeli policeman stalk the compounds; the excavations (which are causing subsidence all the way down to Silwan- a school class room collapsed last year) continue apace.
And all they can find are Arabic relics.
But, anyway, to hell with the mythologies and the ancient history. Denial of justice and human rights have too long been in thrall to them.
15 Apr 2010, 10:45AM
BananaChips:
It’s not speculation but historical fact that Jews were prevented from attended their holy sites when it was controlled by Muslims
But it was speculation we are talking about future resolution, not past actions. Persistent negative speculation and partisan personal opinion are no ‘proof’ of any potential outcome.
it is also a fact that the Dome of the Rock was built on an early Jewish site
That may well be the case, but there seems to be a great deal of archaeological activity on the part of Israel alone to try to determine this conclusively.
IMHO current claims are 2,500 years past their sell-by date and the historical importance should not just be for Jews, Muslims and Christians – they should be protected at all costs for everyone.
Yesterday at sundown Israelis began observance of Memorial Day in remembrance of Israel’s 22,684 fallen soldiers who gave their life to the defense of the nation.
Now despite the fact that there are almost daily postings about Israel in the “Comment is Free” Middle East section, you’re unlikely to know that it is Memorial Day in Israel from reading “Comment is Free” and chances are that this year is going to be no different from other years. For example, from a review of articles published in “Comment is Free” at the same time last year, Memorial Day was not covered. On Memorial Day itself last year (April 28th), there was an article by resident Jew-hater, Ben White, on Fatah and an article by Theobald Jew, Abe Hayeem, on boycotting. What’s worse, on Israel’s Independence Day last year, which follows one day after Memorial Day, there was an article by verstinkener Jew, Antony Lerman, touting the one-state solution.
Anyway, here’s a little something to remember Israel’s fallen soldiers (h/t sababa):
Just as terrorism perpetrated against Jews is downplayed or ignored by the Guardian, the kidnapping of Gilad Shalit, whose captivity is now in its 1393rd day, warrants nary a mention. For that reason, we recently added a picture of Gilad Shalit to the left hand side bar of the blog (scroll down).
Here’s another way in which awareness as to the plight of Gilad Shalit is being raised – a flash mob of 212 high schoolers from Alexander Muss High School in Israel recently descended upon the Tel Aviv port boardwalk to the sounds of Matisyahu (remixed by Infected Mushroom). Check the video out.
Only in Israel.
The role of Brian Whitaker, Middle East editor and reporter for Guardian Unlimited and the Guardian newspaper
This is a cross-post from CAMERA of an article from 2006 that is as relevant then as it is today
In the early years of the Zionist movement, the longtime publisher of the Guardian, C.P. Scott, had a close relationship with Zionist Chaim Weizman, and the left leaning paper was considered highly sensitive to the plight of the Jews and their desire for a homeland. But after Israel’s victories in the 1967 war much of the Left turned against the Jewish state. As a media standard bearer for highbrow left of center politics in Britain, the Guardian followed suit becoming increasingly critical of Israel. In recent years, some have accused the Guardian of fueling hostility towards the Jewish state through its unbalanced reporting of events in the Middle East. The coverage by Brian Whitaker, who has served as the paper’s Middle East Editor since May 1999 and contributes articles for Guardian Unlimited, the internet edition of the Guardian, as well as the Guardian paper, is representative of the paper’s perspective.
Mr. Whitaker’s interest in the Arab world predates his joining the Guardian, as evidenced by the extensive Web site he created in February 1998 and still administers, that “aims to introduce non-Arabs to the Arabs and their culture” and “tries to celebrate the achievements of Arab culture and to discuss its failings openly.” The site originally contained a listing for Palestine, but not one for Israel, which Mr. Whitaker explained was because he only included members of the Arab League, although it now contains a listing ‘Palestine-Israel.’ When mentioning Israel, Mr. Whitaker’s Web site stated, “we follow the definition accepted by most of the international community and the PLO, i.e. the boundaries existing at the start of the 1967 war.”
Many of his articles on Israel appeared in the Internet edition of the Guardian, known as Guardian Unlimited. These articles reveal a skepticism about information provided by the Israeli government, and a suspicion of those who support the Israeli narrative of events. This contrasts with a habit of uncritically including comments that condemn Israel or paint a benign picture of Arab intentions. Whitaker is reflexively antagonistic towards Ariel Sharon, frequently ascribing base motives to the Israeli Prime Minister. He also disparages the Bush administration for what he calls its undeserved support of Israel and claims it is manipulated by ‘neo-conservatives.’ Critical of what he considers overly cautious and docile journalism that is too willing to accept the Israeli perspective, Whitaker’s approach has resulted in errors that are glaring in hindsight. Nevertheless his writings are representative of the Guardian’s approach to the Arab-Israeli conflict.
Here’s another one from the Carlo Strenger thread:
Before…
After…(note the time stamps of the post above – 9.33AM – and compare to the time stamps below indicating the post was disappeared)
This is a guest post by AKUS
There is an article by Carlo Strenger on CiF, April 15th, 2010 which appears to continue the trend we have seen of posting misleading photographs:
“Alert reader” SantaMoniker picked up a few problems with this picture and its caption:
This is a guest post from Margie in Tel Aviv
I suppose that most people would include a visit to Jerusalem’s Old City and the Temple Mount as one of the main attractions of a trip to Israel. A picture such as this, showing the golden dome and the wall of the city evokes nostalgia from those who have made the trip and excites a desire to visit for those who have not been there.
It is therefore to be expected that a travel advertisement for Israel would include this unforgettable scene. Or is it?
This article in the Guardian made me do a double-take.
Why should an ad be banned for using a photo of so-called “East” Jerusalem? According to the article there is a busybody body called the ASA (Advertising Standards Authority), a UK advertising regulator, which objected to this ad for including a picture of “East” Jerusalem, which the Guardian misleadingly considers to be part of the ”Palestinian occupied territories.”
According to the ASA, it adjudicated in favor of the complainant:
“We understood, however, that the status of the occupied territory of the West Bank was the subject of much international dispute, and because we considered that the ad implied that the part of East Jerusalem featured in the image was part of the state of Israel, we concluded that the ad was likely to mislead.
The ad breached CAP Code clause 7.1 (Truthfulness).”
This reads as if the dignitaries of the ASA, have appointed themselves international arbitrators, and have awarded territory to a country that is not mentioned and have furthermore decided that Judaism’s most holy places belong to someone else. It is the Guardian’s gloss on the ”judgement” that makes the unmentioned owner of the holy places into “Palestinian occupied territories”. They fall down themselves on CAP Code clause 7.1 (Truthfulness).
There are obviously no international lawyers on this august body since the judgement given is contrary to international law and to Israeli law.
Considering that there are no boundaries, that there is no agreement signed by Israel and anybody else that the Wall and the Temple Mount belong to anyone at all, there can be no legal objection to the use of these places as tourist attractions particularly seeing that the tour would be authorised to take tourists to the places shown. There is no duplicity. There is no cheating going on here. The customers are going to get what they pay for: a visit to these ancient places.
The Guardian apparently has no appreciation of how absurd it is for an advertising standards board to make such fateful pronouncements, nor is there a comment from the political wing of the newspaper explaining the true legal status of the area in question.
I do hope that the Guardian doesn’t test its value on the market by demanding payment for its ‘news’. I think they’d probably come quite a cropper.
This is a guest post by AKUS
After a long hiatus on CiF – perhaps due to the revelations that Shabi’s knowledge of Mizrachi Jews and Israeli geography fall even below the Guardian’s low standards for contributors trying to blacken Israel’s name – Rachel Shabi is back, this time mourning the plight of ‘Israel’s ‘targeted citizens‘ – a deliberately inflammatory heading taken from a film prepared by Adalah referring to Israel’s Arab minority and a tribute to the Guardian’s campaign to create a completely mythical version of what Israel really is. We can now add ‘incitement’ as well as ‘ignorance’ to Shabi’s unimpressive resume, which includes, incredibly, 89 articles authored or co-authored for the Guardian since 2000, starting with ‘If you don’t eat your ice cream, you can’t have your broccoli’.
As usual with articles on CiF, it is always important to dig behind the spin and see what really underpins the prejudice that is being fed to the readers.
Adalah is an organization ostensibly dedicated to defending Arab minority rights in Israel, but, in reality, its primary purpose is to propose the dismantling of Israel as a Jewish state and blacken Israel’s name internationally. For example, Adalah is firmly on the “apartheid” bandwagon:
Occupation, Colonialism, Apartheid? A re-assessment of Israel’s practices in the OPT under international law: “Professor Dugard posed the question: “Israel is clearly in military occupation of the OPT. At the same time, elements of the occupation constitute forms of colonialism and of apartheid, which are contrary to international law.” Etc. etc.
Moreover, Adalah has developed its own version of a Democratic Constitution for Israel that in its Introduction immediately references apartheid-era South Africa as an example – or the example – of what Israel is like. Par. 4 of Chapter One essentially lays down the PLO’s approach to Israel. It proposes to use of the Right of Return to turn Israel into an Arab-majority state, links the “Nakba” to the “Occupation” since Adalah does not, in fact distinguish between Israel and the Occupied Territories despite defining Israel’s borders as the pre-1967 Green Line in opposition to UNSCR 242 and the various boundary adjustments that have been discussed between Israel and its neighbors including Syria:
“the State of Israel must recognize its responsibility for past injustices suffered by the Palestinian people, both before and after its establishment. The State of Israel must recognize, therefore, its responsibility for the injustices of the Nakba and the Occupation; recognize the right of return of the Palestinian refugees based on UN Resolution 194; recognize the right of the Palestinian people to self-determination; and withdraw from all of the territories occupied in 1967.”
(Note, by the way, the statement that Israel must recognize even injustices incurred by even BEFORE its founding – i.e., under Ottoman and British rule).
Par. 5 attempts to enshrine the idea that Arab citizens of Israel are not, in fact Israelis – they are Palestinian Arabs:
“The Palestinian Arab citizens of the State of Israel have lived in their homeland for innumerable generations”
Hawkeye
Omar2
WellofSense
Medusa
The Alchemist
Louise
Tosca
Maimon
Telling the Truth
Israelinurse
Adam Levick
Margie in Tel Aviv
Guest/Cross Post
Hadar Sela
Living under a military junta
April 21, 2010 in Uncategorized | Tags: Comment is Free, Guardian, Oliver Worth, Seth Freedman | by Hawkeye | 33 comments
This is a guest post by Oliver Worth
It’s official: The rights of private enterprises to decide what to sell is now the antithesis of democracy – that is, of course, if one reads Seth Freedman’s latest CiF piece ‘Suppressing Book Bolsters Settlers’.
Freedman begins by making a peculiar comparison between those trying to boycott Israel from abroad and the choice of the Tzomet Sefarim bookstore to stop selling a left wing political pamphlet. What he doesn’t mention, or fails to see, is that these two occurrences couldn’t be further apart. Whilst the decision of the Tzomet Sefarim to stop stocking this particular piece was as a result of unpopularity and customer complaints (a regular occurrence in a democratic society), the tactics used by anti-Israeli boycotters in the UK such as BDS are about preventing people from teaching and speaking – surely the exact opposite of liberal democracy.
What Freedman admits is that there had been a storm of criticism of the pamphlet, though he uses this as his ‘proof’ that the decision was forced because of threats of violence, rather than as obvious reasons why the pamphlet was so unpopular. He refers to quotes in the book such as settlers being referred to as “messianic madmen” and their children as “brainwashed zombies”, yet sees this as a vindication of his belief that the book must have been withdrawn because of threats, rather than because the pamphlet is crass, poorly written and ultimately detrimental to the firm’s bottom line.
Having run out of ideas to justify how a bookstore deciding to stop stocking a book must be the first sign of a totalitarian regime, Freedman goes on to rant about his own experiences in the Israeli territories, writing in a way that would lead one to believe he’d been participating in a situation at home in an Indiana Jones film, before quietly admitting there was actually “no real impediment to our work or safety”.
Seth concludes that this whole event proves that “Israel’s claim to be a fully functional bastion of democracy” is a “facade”, despite the fact that the state did not ban the book, nor even bat an eyelid at the publication of anti-government propaganda in a nation where such rights are cherished. That Freedman sees the rights of businesses to stock what they wish to sell as a contradiction of democracy once again reminds us what can happen when rash politics clash with reason.
The good news is Mr Freedman has inspired me to concoct my own system of democracy detection. Simply go to a bookstore near you, and if the shelves are not laden with extreme political propaganda, you can be sure you’re living under a military junta.
Share this:
Like this: