You are currently browsing the tag archive for the ‘Ali Abunimah’ tag.
This essay was written by Hadar Sela, and published at The Propagandist.
The broadcast and publishing of the leaked ‘Palestine papers’ by Al Jazeera and the Guardian puts a spotlight on some issues which are actually much more interesting and far-reaching than the papers themselves. After all, it is only those who hold completely unrealistic ideas about the Palestinian/Israeli conflict who could claim to be surprised by their content; the rest of us know that in the end, the 2008 Olmert offer is more or less how the future will look because it represents the most Israel can give and the least that the Palestinians can accept.
Nevertheless, we have witnessed waves of selective outrage from foreign journalists and commentators – their words conveying a deep sense of betrayal. Horrified by the Palestinian negotiators’ pragmatism, indignant at the very idea of compromise, they rushed to brand them as traitors and sellers-out of the Palestinian cause.
What is interesting is that these voices are for the most part not coming from the people who would actually be affected by a Palestinian/Israeli agreement. They are coming from those who sit high up in the seats of the amphitheatre, demanding loudly that their favourite gladiator below carry on the fight, despite the fact that he is already wounded, bloody and exhausted.
There is nothing new about this, of course; for many years now certain far-Left journalists, academics, politicians and other ‘pro-Palestinian’ activists who have no physical link to the conflict have displayed much more extreme and uncompromising views than the people who actually live in this region. Every time I encountered the virulent bile and blind hatred spewed by ‘pro-Palestinian’ activists during my recent years spent in the United Kingdom, I would thank my lucky stars that here in the Middle East I get to live with the Palestinian people themselves who are, in general, considerably less extreme than their foreign advocates.
Others who cheer-lead the rejection of compromise from the safety and comfort include the often foreign-born people of Palestinian descent who have made careers out of the prolonged Palestinian struggle. Most of them tend to be ideologically aligned with Hamas, such as electronic Intifada founder Ali Abunimah or ISM founder Huweida Arraf. In addition, there are foreign actors such as Iran, Syria and Qatar for whom the Palestinian/Israeli conflict is a mere side-show in a much bigger spectacle and who shore up the Hamas regime financially and militarily, ensuring that reconciliation with other Palestinians remains just as remote as compromise with Israel.
The Jerusalem Post recently reported that twenty-six former EU leaders issued a letter (to current EU leaders) calling for boycotts and sanctions against Israel. The letter was signed by EU’s former top diplomat, Javier Solana, former Irish President Mary Robinson, and former German ex-chancellor Helmut Schmidt, among others.
In light of this letter, we’re cross-posting the following, by Naftali Balanson (Managing Editor of NGO Monitor), which makes a moral case against BDS. While Balanson’s piece naturally focuses on the NGO angle, his argument is relevant in the broader context as well, and serves as a strong rebuttal to arguments made by commentators at the Guardian (such as Ali Abunimah, Ben White, and others), who shamefully abuse the rhetoric of human rights to advance highly discriminatory policies against the Jewish state.
This is cross posted from NGO Monitor, and originally appeared in the online journal, Zeek:
New Israel Fund (NIF) Director of Communications Naomi Paiss “Don’t Divest; Invest” makes an important statement by rejecting the global boycotts, divestment, and sanctions (BDS) movement and its accompanying “apartheid” rhetoric. Paiss reaffirms the notion that BDS is totally incongruous with Jewish values, and demonstrates that progressives within the community cannot tolerate its “inflammatory and counter-productive” agenda. Her piece is a sharp blow to the very legitimacy of BDS campaigns, particularly those conducted by Jewish groups (see “Peace Process or Land Grab?” by Rebecca Vilkomerson).
However, although her argument is compelling, Paiss significantly understates the case against BDS. Yes, attempts to isolate Israel “penalize the innocent along with the guilty, push moderates towards right-wing nationalism, and spur rejection of progressive and humanist values.” But, more importantly, BDS is the antithesis of universal human rights values, rooted in immoral double standards that single out and condemn Israel as a pariah state. The BDS movement also rejects the very existence of Israel as a Jewish entity. Inasmuch as BDS activists seek to eliminate Jewish self-determination, the movement (as a movement, not necessarily every individual linked to it) is anti-Semitic.
The core goals of the BDS agenda expose the true nature of the movement. One of them is the “rights of Palestinian refugees to return to their homes,” falsely portrayed as a “precept of international law.” There is no such legal obligation, nor is the right of return a peaceful goal. Rather, it is an attempt to reverse partition, refight 1948 – at least demographically – and overturn the right to Jewish sovereignty.
It is, therefore, no surprise that proponents of BDS resort to racist and anti-Semitic rhetoric. A particularly offensive and common theme – exemplified by the hate speech of PACBI’s Omar Barghouti, Electronic Intifada’s Ali Abunimah, and others – is identifying Israel with Nazi Germany and the IDF with Nazi soldiers. The Palestinian Christian non-governmental organization (NGO) known as Sabeel claims that “Jesus is on the cross again with thousands of crucified Palestinians around him,” persecuted by an “Israeli government crucifixion system.” These pronouncements revive classic anti-Semitic theological themes.
A recent typical “Guardian Left” anti-American rant published on CiF by Elizabeth Wurtzel – America, land of the free to be stupid - produced this (which was a reply to another commenter who was critical of Wurtzel’s essay):
Hmmm…Israel killed President Kennedy? I gotta admit, I was caught a bit off-guard by that one. There are clearly some anti-Israel/anti-Semitic conspiracy theories that are more popular than others. I – though I pride myself on being “in the know” on which historical calamities the Jewish community is responsible for – actually had to do a few minutes of research on this one. I discovered that the “Israel/Mossad assassinated JFK” conspiracy is shared by a truly bizarre ideologically diverse array of figures – such as brutal Arab dictators (Libyan leader Muammar Qadhafi) and American anti-Semitic conspiracy theorists (Jeff Rense).
Sadly, since I’m only 42 years old, and didn’t receive my official Mossad Receiver until many years after the assassination in 1963 (Note to Ben White, Ali Abunimah, Ken Livingston, George Galloway, John Pilger and others: Yes, we all really do have one!) I’ll never know for sure what my fellow Jews/Israelis did or didn’t know about JFK’s assassination.
Fortunately – especially when I’m having a bad day, and the challenges of life seem especially overwhelming – I can always count on either Guardian contributors or commenters to reassure me of my community’s nearly omnipotent power to effect world events and change the course of history.
Whether spreading the Black Plague, inventing Capitalism (and Communism!), fomenting world wars, preventing world peace, causing 9/11, controlling U.S. foreign policy, or harvesting organs, I gotta admit. We totally rock!
Ali Abunimah’s hatred for Israel is legion. Abunimah is the co-founder of the anti-Israel propaganda site, Electronic Intifada (EI) – a site which doesn’t simply criticize Israel for its policies. Rather, it is a propaganda offensive aimed at portraying Israel as a monstrous state. Abunimah strongly supports the dissolution, and radical reconstitution, of Israel into the 51st majority Muslim state – a position, let’s remember, which squarely falls within the European Union working definition of ant-Semitism. He also has flirted with, and seemingly justified, comparisons between Israel and Nazi Germany – also anti-Semitic within the EU definition.
Heres’s the text from the EU document:
“Examples of the ways in which antisemitism manifests itself with regard to the state of Israel taking into account the overall context could include”:
- Denying the Jewish people their right to self-determination, e.g., by claiming the the existence of the state of Israel is a racist endeavor
- Drawing comparisons of contemporary Israeli policy to that of the Nazis
He’s also a contributor – along with Noam Chomsky, Philip Weiss, Glenn Greenwald, Sara Roy, Omar Barghouti, Kevin Ovenden, Ilan Pappé, Ken O’Keefe, and Adam Shapiro – to the pro-IHH book about the flotilla incident, called “Midnight on the Mavi Marmara”. An excerpt from the book, notes:
“Midnight on the Mavi Marmara reveals why the attack on Gaza Freedom Flotilla may just turn out to be Israel’s Selma, Alabama: the beginning of the end for an apartheid Palestine.“
Here are some of Abunimah’s greatest hits:
Abunimah writing for Electronic Intifada
Israel-Nazi Comparison
“Gaza will likely be seen as the turning point when Israeli propaganda lost its power to mystify, silence and intimidate as it has for so long. Even the Nazi Holocaust, long deployed by Zionists to silence Israel’s critics, is becoming a liability; once unimaginable comparisons are now routinely heard. Jewish and Palestinian academics likened Israel’s actions in Gaza to the Nazi massacre in the Warsaw Ghetto. A Vatican cardinal referred to Gaza as a “giant concentration camp.” UK Member of Parliament Gerald Kaufman, once a staunch Zionist, told the House of Commons, “My grandmother was ill in bed when the Nazis came to her home town of Staszow, [Poland]. A German soldier shot her dead in her bed.” Kaufman continued, “my grandmother did not die to provide cover for Israeli soldiers murdering Palestinian grandmothers in Gaza.” He denounced the Israeli military spokesperson’s justifications as the words “of a Nazi.” - Why Israel wont’ survive, Jan. 19, 2009
The estimable Yaacov Lozowick brought to our attention the revealing Tweets made by occasional Guardian contributor Ali Abunimah on the subject of the brutal murder of four Israeli citizens on August 31st by Hamas terrorists. Besides penning articles for the Guardian and other supposedly reputable publications, Abunimah is of course one of the co-founders of the viciously anti-Israel ‘Electronic Intifada’ website – along with Nigel Parry, Arjan El Fassed and Laurie King-Irani. Readers will doubtless be aware that the Guardian considers Electronic Intifada to be a ‘useful link’ and that it is defined as such on the CiF Israel page.
- Useful links
- Israeli Knesset
- Office of the prime minister
- Haaretz
- Jerusalem Post
- Gush Shalom
- PLO negotiation affairs department
- Hamas military wing
- Maan news agency
- Palestine Monitor
- Electronic Intifada
- Wafa news agency
- Bitter lemons
- UN Office for the Co-ordination of Humanitarian Affairs
- UN Relief Agency for Palestinian Refugees
A closer perusal of the activities of Electronic Intifada’s co-founders – none of whom lives in the Middle East, by the way – does indeed reveal some interesting links and connections which it may be useful for readers to be aware of when reading Abunimah’s next article or even when presented with material and links from EI as so often happens above the line at CiF.
Dr. Laurie King-Irani lives in Canada and is an anthropologist and research associate at the University of Victoria, BC as well as coordinator of the International Campaign for Justice for the Victims of Sabra and Shatila; the organization responsible for trying to utilize laws of universal jurisdiction in the Belgian courts to prosecute Ariel Sharon
Nigel Parry hails from Scotland and is a former webmaster for Birzeit University. He now appears to be engaged in founding a website named delegitimize.com. At least he’s honest.
Dutch Palestinian Arjan El Fassed is a former employee of Oxfam International and Oxfam Novib and has recently taken up a new career in Dutch politics on behalf of the Green Left Party. He is a founder of Al-Awda – aka the Palestinian Right of Return Coalition.
American Palestinian Ali Abunimah lives in Chicago and as well as being vice president of the Arab American Action Network, a board member for the Sabeel Ecumenical Liberation Theology Centre and active with the American-Arab Anti-Discrimination Committee (here is a paper her wrote for the organization promoting the right of return) he is also an endorser of and participant in the Gaza Freedom March (which is linked of course to the ISM) and is also active in Al-Awda.
H/T: Yaacov Lozowick’s Ruminations:
Ali Abunimah is the founder of Electronic Intifada, and contributor for the Guardian, Huffington Post, and New York Times when these progressive voices need a “moderate” Palestinian-perspective op-ed. Abunimah, it should be known, doesn’t believe Israel has the right to exist, and has suggested that Israel’s actions in Gaza are similar to the Nazi massacre in the Warsaw Ghetto.
Here are his responses via Twitter to the cold-blooded execution-style murder of four Jews earlier this evening, two of them women and one pregnant:
Civilian deaths are always tragic. Israel must stop using civilian settlers as human shields for the land it is stealing
And, this:
And it is indeed tragic Israel cynically uses Jewish civilians including kids as human shields for expropriated land.
And, just for clarity, he notes:
that’s my view on this attack too if you need me to grind the point. Is that still unclear?
No Ali, I think we’re all quite clear on your views.

































































Ali Abunimah makes UNRWA Spokesperson Chris Gunness “Giggle”
February 20, 2012 in Comments which are off-topic, ad hominem, racist, vulgar or include threats of violence will be deleted | Tags: Ali Abunimah, Antisemitism, Comment is Free, Delegitimization, Gaza, Gilad Atzmon, Hamas, Hezbollah, Terrorism, United Nations Relief and Works Agency for Palestine Refugees in the Near East, UNRWA | by Adam Levick | 11 comments
The Tweets by Chris Gunness, spokesperson for UNRWA (United Nations Relief and Works Agency), are worth following for those Twitterers amongst you interested in gleaning insights into the mind of those in the Palestinian Refugee industry.
Gunness has nary an unkind word for Hamas, the authoritarian Palestinian leadership in Gaza representing the only government in the world led by a recognized terrorist movement, yet continually imputes guilt to Israel for engaging in efforts to stop the flow of rockets to the strip, 676 of which were fired last year from the territory.
Here’s a quote by Gunness in a 2011 Guardian piece, which interprets Israeli efforts to prevent deadly arms from reaching Hamas as systemic cruelty, whose intent is to sow misery upon innocent civilians.
Moreover, by UNRWA’s expansive definition of what constitutes a Palestinian refugee, based on a quote from the same Guardian piece, 1.5 million Palestinians living in a Palestinian run polity in Gaza are still considered “refugees”.
Further, as research by NGO Monitor has demonstrated, UNRWA funds (almost entirely provided by voluntary contributions from governments and the European Union) “are often used for UNRWA schools and other facilities…[which] teach hatred and encourage incitement, [and] the evidence demonstrates that UNRWA staff allowed terror related activities in its camps [in Gaza and the West Bank].”
I have found nothing Gunness has written or Tweeted suggesting he is aware or concerned about such incitement, which provides context for this recent Tweet about Ali Abunimah, co-founder of Electronic Intifada, and CiF contributor through 2009.
Boy, where to begin?
Abunimah is an American pro-Palestinian activist who opposes the Jewish state’s existence, and who has not hesitated to compare Israel to South African apartheid and even Nazi Germany - describing Gaza as a “ghetto” and a “concentration camp” and arguing that “Zionism is not atonement for the Holocaust, but its continuation in spirit.”
Abunimah has also characterized the Jewish state as “supremacist”, echoing a trope popularized by, among others, David Duke and Gilad Atzmon, and has also described Israeli policy towards Palestinians as “potentially genocidal”.
Further, Abunimah has suggested that suicide bombings and other acts of terrorism by Hamas and Hezbollah against Israeli civilians could justly be seen as legitimate to the degree such tactics resemble ”other nationalist movements facing foreign occupation”.
So, the anti-racist Ali Abunimah is a proponent of the demise of the Jewish state – a nation which he has characterized as “supremacist”, potentially genocidal, and even Nazi-like – and has sought to justify terrorism against Jewish civilians.
If your name is Chris Gunness, it’s all apparently enough to make you giggle.
Related articles
Share this: