RSS
This Washington Post Writer Defames Israel Online and In Print
Since October 7, when Hamas terrorists brutally invaded Israel and slaughtered hundreds of innocent Israeli civilians, Washington Post columnist Karen Attiah has dedicated both her weekly newsletter and much of her social media to discussing Israel, the Palestinians, and the Jewish state’s ongoing war against the Hamas terror organization.
However, despite being an award-winning journalist, Attiah’s published pieces and social media posts are chockful of misleading statements, baseless opinions, and a skewed analysis that serve only to construct a narrative that is solely bent on tarnishing the Jewish state.
In particular, the three key ways by which Karen Attiah develops her toxic narrative is through the implicit justification of Hamas’ attack, the manipulation of language, and the twisting of facts and history.
“If Israel proceeds to make good on its threats to turn Gaza into flattened pavement, it’s all the more clear that ‘never again’ does not apply to Arab or Muslim lives,” Karen Attiah writes. https://t.co/SFu0RtCU0l
— Washington Post Opinions (@PostOpinions) October 14, 2023
Karren Attiah’s Reaction to October 7
In her first Washington Post newsletter following the October 7 massacres, Karen Attiah referred to Hamas’ attack as “horrific,” “unprecedented,” and a “nightmare.” On Twitter, she reposted an update on the number of Israeli deaths with the comment “My god.”
However, in light of her robust activity on social media in the days following October 7, it appears that the above is merely a lip service condemnation while her deeper feelings about Hamas’ invasion are much more sinister and alarming.
As one analyst put it, Attiah’s reaction to October 7 “fell somewhere between dismissive and giddy.”
Viewing Hamas’ brutal assault as an expression of decolonization, Attiah reportedly reposted a now-deleted tweet that exulted in the attack: “What did y’all think decolonization meant? vibes? papers? essays? Losers.”
Similarly, Attiah also reposted a tweet that declared “Settlers are not the victims here and never will be.”
On October 8, in response to a tweet that downplayed the value of “armed struggle,” Attiah tweeted, “There are a lot of people going off of vibes and feel-good platitudes about decolonization and resistance, not actual historical knowledge and research about the global south.”
That same day, she also tweeted that “We are forced to see state violence as justified + moral, while violence by non-state actors isn’t. This is changing.”
There are a lot of people going off of vibes and feel-good platitudes about decolonization and resistance, not actual historical knowledge and research about the global south. https://t.co/KkdqbW85UY
— Karen Attiah (@KarenAttiah) October 8, 2023
Even more than two weeks later, when a large extent of Hamas’ atrocities had been made public, Karen Attiah felt it necessary to repost a tweet by Marc Lamont Hill that read, “So many university academics who insist upon doing performative, virtue signaling ‘land acknowledgements’ at every public event are eerily silent as real liberation struggles are happening. Guess decolonization really is a metaphor for some folk…”
In her first newsletter following the Hamas attack, Attiah decried the fact that “People using the terms ‘decolonization’ and ‘liberation’ in describing Palestinians’ struggle for human rights have had their remarks taken out of context and have been accused of championing Hamas’s brand of terrorism.”
While she might believe there is some distinction to be made, it appears from her social media history, that Karen Attiah’s reaction to Hamas’ terrorism is at best ambivalent and at worse supportive.
From “Ethnic Cleansing” to “Never Again”: Misuse of Language
One of the ways in which Karen Attiah frames her anti-Israel narrative is through the use (and abuse) of evocative language in describing Israel’s military response to Hamas’ brutality.
Throughout her newsletters, Attiah refers to the IDF’s defensive military action as “atrocities,” “collective punishment,” “genocidal,” and the “ethnic cleansing of Palestinians.”
She also recently tweeted that it was “not a war against Hamas. This is Israel waging a colonial-style, punitive massacre against Palestinians.”
This is not a war against Hamas.
This is Israel waging a colonial-style, punitive massacre against Palestinians.
— Karen Attiah (@KarenAttiah) November 11, 2023
In addition to her use of direct language, Karen Attiah also uses insinuations to negatively associate Israel with some of the darkest events in modern history.
In one newsletter, Attiah wrote that “The last time millions of people were targeted and trapped based on their identity, the world said ‘never again.’”
By invoking the terminology “never again,” Attiah is drawing a direct and baseless comparison between Israel’s military struggle against the Hamas terror group and Nazi Germany’s attempt to destroy European Jewry during the Holocaust.
In a later newsletter, Attiah implicitly compares Israel to the French in Algeria. Here, too, the comparison is absurd, as France was a colonial power ruling over the native population while Israel is the embodiment of an indigenous population’s return to sovereignty in their ancestral homeland.
The Nazis trapped millions of Jews & transported them to their deaths.
Israel is helping Palestinians escape while rooting out Hamas evil that’s ACTUALLY perpetrating atrocities based on identity.
How dare @washingtonpost allow @KarenAttiah‘s antisemitism to infect its pages. https://t.co/biLeEPboRT pic.twitter.com/IBZ7F3kJ1d
— HonestReporting (@HonestReporting) October 14, 2023
A third way that Karen Attiah misuses language to further her anti-Israel narrative is by questioning the use of certain terminology.
For example, in one newsletter, she questioned the use of the term “human shields” when describing Hamas’ cynical use of Gazan civilians as cover for its terrorist activities.
To her mind, the term
means any Palestinian is a possible vector for violence, an unwitting Trojan horse for terrorism. You know the thing about shields and armor? Shields are allowed to be penetrated and broken, so long as the enemy is vanquished. Is this how we should be talking about people, human beings?
This quote reveals a lot about Karen Attiah’s mindset: If Israel is unable to fight Hamas due to the latter’s use of humans shields (a viewpoint not based in international law), then any Israeli response is to be condemned. Ultimately, this rewards Hamas’ violation of human rights while punishing Israel for its defense of its citizenry.
Misuse of Facts & History
One of the most concerning issues with Karen Attiah’s analysis is her reliance on misleading statements and skewed facts to support her troubling narrative.
Several examples of Karen Attiah’s loose grip on the facts include:
1) In one piece, Attiah claims that “the angry discourse in response to the Oct. 7 attack has been undeniably anti-Arab and Islamophobic in nature, and utterly dehumanizing.”
This statement completely ignores the rise in antisemitism following the October 7 massacre and Israel’s response. Only four days after the publication of Attiah’s piece, the ADL noted an almost 400% increase in antisemitic incidents since October 7.
2) In another piece, Karen Attiah claims that “Black writers and civil rights leaders have a long history of seeing the Israeli-Palestinian conflict through the lens of the Black struggle for freedom and resistance to violent imperialism.” She then lists such leaders as Malcolm X, Muhammad Ali, and Huey Newton.
However, to make her case, Attiah purposefully ignores the history of Black and civil rights leaders supporting Israel and Zionism, including Martin Luther King, Jr., Bayard Rustin, and John Lewis.
3) Attiah claims that in 2018, Marc Lamont Hill “was removed as a commentator from CNN after expressing solidarities with Palestinians.” This minimizes what Hill actually did, which was call for a “free Palestine from the river to the sea,” which many interpret to mean the dismantling of the Jewish state.
4) In her latest piece, Karen Attiah claims that the Israel-Palestine issue is “a fundamentally British colonial project.” Throughout the piece, she attempts to portray Israel as being the creation of British imperialism by citing the Balfour Declaration, a few pronouncements by Winston Churchill, and the 1922 British Mandate.
However, in order to present this overly simplistic picture, Attiah has to ignore the fact that Britain severely limited Jewish immigration in 1939, it abstained from the UN partition vote in 1947, it battled Zionist militias fighting for independence in the late 1940s, it did not recognize Israel until 1950, and the British-trained forces in Jordan and Egypt were part of the invasion of Israel in 1948.
Karen Attiah appears to hold a rigid worldview, which focuses on observing reality through the lenses of race and decolonization. However, by viewing the world this way, Attiah is forced to disregard certain facts that do not fit neatly into an ideological box.
This not only leaves her analysis lacking in credibility but also deprives her readers at The Washington Post of the proper nuanced and intelligent analysis that they deserve.
The post This Washington Post Writer Defames Israel Online and In Print first appeared on Algemeiner.com.
RSS
McGill cancels talk with former Hamas insider turned Israel advocate, citing fears of violence
McGill University has canceled an on-campus event planned by Jewish students—and temporarily halted bookings for all extracurricular activities—following threats of violence along with a death threat, as outlined in a […]
The post McGill cancels talk with former Hamas insider turned Israel advocate, citing fears of violence appeared first on The Canadian Jewish News.
RSS
US Lawmakers Introduce Bipartisan Bill to Strip Funding From Universities That Boycott Israel
US Rep. Josh Gottheimer (D-NJ) at a press conference in Bergenfield, New Jersey, US on June 5, 2023. Photo: Kyle Mazza/NurPhoto via Reuters Connect
US Reps. Virginia Foxx (R-NC) and Josh Gottheimer (D-NJ) on Tuesday introduced bipartisan legislation to cut off federal funding from universities that engage in boycotts of Israel.
The legislation, titled “The Protect Economic Freedom Act,” would render universities that participate in the boycott, divestment, and sanctions (BDS) movement against Israel ineligible for federal funding under Title IV of the Higher Education Act, prohibiting them from receiving federal student aid. The bill would also mandate that colleges and universities submit evidence that they are not participating in commercial boycotts against the Jewish state.
“Enough is enough. Appeasing the antisemitic mobs on college campuses threatens the safety of Jewish students and faculty and it undermines the relationship between the US and one of our strongest allies. If an institution is going to capitulate to the BDS movement, there will be consequences — starting with the Protect Economic Freedom Act,” Foxx, chairwoman of the House Committee on Education and the Workforce, said in a statement.
Gottheimer added that the legislation is necessary to thwart the surging tide of antisemitism on college campuses. Although the lawmaker noted that students are allowed to engage in free expression regarding the ongoing war in Gaza, he argued that blanket boycotts against Israel endanger the lives of Jewish students and community members.
“The goal of the antisemitic BDS movement is to annihilate the democratic State of Israel, America’s critical ally in the global fight against terror. While students and faculty are free to speak their minds and disagree on policy issues, we cannot allow antisemitism to run rampant and risk the safety and security of Jewish students, staff, faculty, and guests on college campuses,” Gottheimer said in a statement. “The new bipartisan Protect Economic Freedom Act will give the Department of Education a critical new tool to combat the antisemitic BDS movement on college campuses. Now more than ever, we must take the necessary steps to protect our Jewish community.”
The legislation instructs the US Department of Education to keep a record of universities that refuse to confirm their non-participation in anti-Israel boycotts. The list of universities in non-compliance with the legislation would be made publicly available.
In the year following the Palestinian terrorist group Hamas’s massacre acrosssouthern Israel, universities across the country have found themselves embroiled in controversies regarding campus antisemitism. In the immediate aftermath of the terrorist attacks in Israel, hordes of students and faculty orchestrated protests and demonstrations condemning the Jewish state. Student groups at elite universities such as Harvard and Columbia issued statements blaming Israel for the attacks and expressing support for Hamas.
Several high-profile universities have also shown a significant level of tolerance for anti-Jewish sentiment festering on their campuses. Northwestern University, for example, capitulated to demands of anti-Israel activists to remove Sabra Hummus from campus dining halls because of its connections to Israel. At Stanford University, Jewish students have reported being forced to condemn Israel before being allowed to enter campus parties. Students at the University of Pennsylvania and Brown University launched unsuccessful attempts to convince the university to divest endowment funds from companies tied to Israel.
The post US Lawmakers Introduce Bipartisan Bill to Strip Funding From Universities That Boycott Israel first appeared on Algemeiner.com.
RSS
Harvard Chaplains Omit Antisemitism From Statement on Antisemitic Incident
Demonstrators take part in an “Emergency Rally: Stand With Palestinians Under Siege in Gaza,” amid the ongoing conflict between Israel and Hamas, at Harvard University in Cambridge, Massachusetts, US, Oct. 14, 2023. Photo: REUTERS/Brian Snyder
Harvard University’s Office of the Chaplain and Religious and Spiritual Life is being criticized by a rising Jewish civil rights activist for omitting any mention of antisemitism from a statement addressing antisemitic behavior.
The sharp words followed the office’s response to a hateful demonstration on campus in which pro-Hamas students stood outside Harvard Hillel and called for it to banned from campus. Such a demand is not new, as it began earlier this semester at the direction of the National Students for Justice in Palestine (NSJP) organization, which coordinates the lion’s share of anti-Zionist activity on college campuses.
As seen in footage of the demonstration, the students chanted “Zionists aren’t welcome here!” and held signs which accused the organization — the largest campus organization for Jewish students in the world — of embracing “war criminals” and genocide.
Addressing the behavior, Harvard Chaplains issued a statement, which is now being pointed to as a symbol of higher education’s indifference to the unique hatred of antisemitism, as well as its permutation as anti-Zionism.
“We have noticed a trend of expression in which entire groups of students are told they ‘are not welcome here’ because of their religious, cultural, ethnic, or political commitments and identities, or are targeted through acts of vandalism,” the office said, seemingly circumventing the matter at hand. “We find this trend disturbing and anathema to the dialogue and connection across lines of difference that must be a central value and practice of a pluralistic institution of higher learning.”
It continued, “Student groups who are singled out in this way experience such language and acts of vandalism as a painful attack that undermines the acceptance and flourishing of religious diversity here at Harvard. Let us all endeavor to care for one another in these divisive times.”
Recent Harvard graduate Shabbos Kestenbaum, who addressed the Republican National Convention in August to discuss the ways which progressive bias in higher education fosters anti-Zionism and anti-Western ideologies, described the statement as a moral failure in a post on X/Twitter on Tuesday.
“Disappointing,” he said. “After Harvard Jews were told by masked students ‘Zionists aren’t welcome here’ outside of the Hillel, the Chaplain Office finally released a statement that did not include the words Jew, Zionism, Israel, or antisemitism. A total abdication of religious responsibility.”
Kestenbaum noted in a later statement that Harvard’s chief diversity and inclusion officer, Sherri Ann Charleston, has so far declined to speak on the issue at all. He charged that when Charleston “isn’t plagiarizing, she and DEI normalize antisemitism,” referring to evidence, first reported by the Washington Free Beacon, that Charleston is a serial plagiarist who climbed the hierarchy of the higher education establishment by pilfering other people’s scholarship.
Harvard University president Alan Garber — installed after former president Claudine Gay resigned following revelations that she is also a serial plagiarist — has, experts have said, been inconsistent in managing the campus’ unrest.
During summer, The Harvard Crimson reported that Harvard downgraded “disciplinary sanctions” it levied against several pro-Hamas protesters it suspended for illegally occupying Harvard Yard for nearly five weeks, a reversal of policy which defied the university’s previous statements regarding the matter. Unrepentant, the students, members of the group Harvard Out of Occupied Palestine (HOOP), celebrated the revocation of the punishments on social media and promised to disrupt the campus again.
Earlier this semester, however, Garber appeared to denounce a pro-Hamas student group which marked the anniversary of Hamas’s Oct. 7 attacks on Israel by praising the brutal invasion as an act of revolutionary justice that should be repeated until the Jewish state is destroyed, despite having earlier announced a new “institutional neutrality” policy which ostensibly prohibits the university from weighing in on contentious political issues. While Garber ultimately has said more than Gay when the same group praised the Oct. 7 massacre last academic year, his administration’s handling of campus antisemitism has been ambiguous, according to observers — and described even by students who benefited from its being so as “caving in.”
The university’s perceived failure to address antisemitism has had legal consequences.
Earlier this month, a lawsuit accusing it of ignoring antisemitism was cleared to proceed to discovery, a phase of the case which may unearth damaging revelations about how college officials discussed and crafted policy responses to anti-Jewish hatred before and after Hamas’s massacre across southern Israel last Oct. 7.
The case, filed by the Louis D. Brandeis Center for Human Rights Under Law, centers on several incidents involving Harvard Kennedy School professor Marshall Ganz during the 2022-2023 academic year.
Ganz allegedly refused to accept a group project submitted by Israeli students for his course, titled “Organizing: People, Power, Change,” because they described Israel as a “liberal Jewish democracy.” He castigated the students over their premise, the Brandeis Center says, accusing them of “white supremacy” and denying them the chance to defend themselves. Later, Ganz allegedly forced the Israeli students to attend “a class exercise on Palestinian solidarity” and the taking of a class photograph in which their classmates and teaching fellows “wore ‘keffiyehs’ as a symbol of Palestinian support.”
During an investigation of the incidents, which Harvard delegated to a third party firm, Ganz admitted that he believed “that the students’ description of Israel as a Jewish democracy … was similar to ‘talking about a white supremacist state.’” The firm went on to determine that Ganz “denigrated” the Israeli students and fostered “a hostile learning environment,” conclusions which Harvard accepted but never acted on.
Follow Dion J. Pierre @DionJPierre.
The post Harvard Chaplains Omit Antisemitism From Statement on Antisemitic Incident first appeared on Algemeiner.com.
You must be logged in to post a comment Login