RSS
Jews Supporting the Ideology of Elimination
Peter Beinart. Photo: Joe Mabel via Wikimedia Commons.
JNS.org – The Student Nonviolent Coordinating Committee published a position paper on Aug. 15, 1967 in reaction to the Six-Day War, in which they wrote of the “Zionists … illegal takeover of Palestine” and that “the United Nations partition plan … was not legal under the Charter of the United Nations and was never approved by any African, Asian or Middle-Eastern country.” In fact, already in the June-July 1967 issue of the SNCC newsletter, one can find a semblance of the current theme of intersectionality in the explanation of the editors that African-Americans must know and understand what “our brothers are doing in their homelands” in Africa, Asia and the Middle East.
Furthermore, the SNCC asserted in August that “Israel is and always has been the tool and foot-hold for American and British exploitation.” In addition to referring to a conspiracy theory about the Rothschilds, the statement ends:
“America has worked with and used powerful organized Zionist movement to take over another people’s home and to replace these people with a partner who has well served America’s purpose … to exploit and control the nations of Africa, the Middle East and Africa.”
By 1973, as a result of Maxime Rodinson’s treatise that originally appeared in French in 1967 (having been written in 1966) titled “Israel: A Colonial-Settler State?”, the portrayal of Zionism and Israel as illegitimate and representing the worst example of what the New Left opposed was well entrenched. The foundations for today’s thought framework were being constructed already then.
Thus, in 2018, one could read at the OpenDemocracy website, in total falsification, that: “The first European Jews landed on the shores of Palestine and established early settlements in the 19th century. In 1948, Zionist forces systematically took over land. … The foundations of Israel are rooted in a colonial project that has modernized its face but continues to subject Palestinians …” And slowly, but surely, this framework of the conflict settled into the minds of academics and then into university teaching staff and then into the minds of the students.
But what was required was a specific Jewish twist to this process, an obversion of the simple truth. This was provided by the neo-Marxist progressive camp that was developing.
Its eventual formulation was provided by journalist Peter Beinart, writing in The New York Times on Oct. 23 that “Jews in the United States, and even Israel, were beginning to see Palestinian liberation as a form of Jewish liberation as well.” An earlier version of this catchphrase was that of sociologist Na’ama Carlin, dual Israeli-Australian citizen, who penned “No liberation until Palestinian liberation” in Eureka Street on April 16, 2018. In July of that year, marchers of IfNotNow carried a banner, seen in New York magazine, which read “The Jewish Future Demands Palestinian Freedom.” The fates of the two peoples were being intertwined, although there was no value equivalency—historical, cultural, literary, religious or legal in any way.
As it happened, Beinart, who has become the Moses leading Jewish youth out of Zionism, has now adopted the position that “A Jewish state … is not the essence of Zionism. The essence of Zionism is a Jewish home in the land of Israel … that can provide refuge and rejuvenation … not a Jewish state but a Jewish society, a Jewish home.” We witness a reborn Ahad Ha-Amism, that “The main point … is not how much we do but how we do it” as he wrote in 1891.
For Beinart, the goal is “equality,” which he must know is just another instrument of Palestinianism that would do away with a Jewish state. He even shrugged off Arab violence, writing:
“Yes, there are Palestinians who have committed acts of terrorism. But so have the members of many oppressed groups. History shows that when people gain their freedom, violence declines.”
I am resigned to the fact that Beinart would simply shrink off the observation that since 2005, Gaza has been unoccupied and “liberated,” and yet the violence has only increased. Israel does not oppress them but defends itself from their intent to oppress—and worse. The explanation for that, which eludes him and his followers, is that their goal is not that of Beinart’s. Violence is not a means but the essence of their goal: the elimination of the Zionist project and the eradication of the Jews, and not just those living in Israel.
These past few weeks have seen Jews, even those called rabbis, identifying with Hamas. They blocked the White House, sat in at the U.S. Capitol and the Grand Plaza Station, and milled about at the Statue of Liberty. They are not many, but their influence, it would appear, has spread across dozens of campuses and has emboldened Arab/Islamic students, as well as Christian anti-Semites, to bully, threaten, verbally and physically abuse Jewish students and others who support Israel. Their hate finds comfort in the Beinart/IfNotNow/JVP actions and words.
For decades, all hoped that the Arabs who self-identified as Palestinians would learn the norms of democracy and even liberalism from their close proximity, both in Israel and in the administered territories, to Israel’s vibrant society. It did not happen as expected. Yet the ideology of mutual interdependence still pulses through their brain cells. Even the Oct. 7 pogrom/massacre was brushed off by Beinart as being the result of Israeli brutality.
The vast majority of Gazans (as well as those living of Judea and Samaria) applaud the shedding of Jewish blood, handing out sweets for the cameras. Thousands of families are supported by “pay-for-slay” terror stipends doled out by Palestinian leadership.
(As an aside, I find it mind-bogglingly ironic that the current U.S. administration is threatening to withhold a supply of assault rifles from Israel, fearing that they may go to “extremist settlers,” yet have not truly pressured the Palestinian Authority to halt funds going directly to anti-Jewish terror, not to mention legislating American gun-control laws).
Jews supporting the eliminationist ideology, knowingly or not, are not only irrational but, in the long run, self-destructive. Theirs is a harmful obverse ingredient for Jewish survival.
The post Jews Supporting the Ideology of Elimination first appeared on Algemeiner.com.
RSS
Wikipedia’s Serious Problem: Bias Against Israel
An aerial view shows the bodies of victims of an attack following a mass infiltration by Hamas gunmen from the Gaza Strip lying on the ground in Kibbutz Kfar Aza, in southern Israel, Oct. 10, 2023. Photo: REUTERS/Ilan Rosenberg
The report that Wikipedia’s volunteer editors are labeling the Anti-Defamation League (ADL) as an unreliable source of information on certain topics — including antisemitism related to Israel and Zionism — is a much more serious problem than an attack on a particular institution. Instead, it speaks to how much the bias against Israel and the indifference to antisemitism has spread to other organizations and informational platforms in this country.
There are those in the Jewish community who go so far as to claim that any criticism of Israel is really a cover for antisemitism. This is absurd. Israel is a country like any other, and its policies are subject to criticism, and even condemnation, as we see taking place within the country itself. Serious people, including those at ADL, reject outright the idea that Israel is beyond criticism, and that when criticism of Israel appears, it is a manifestation of antisemitism.
On the other hand, equally absurd — but much more dangerous because it is accepted in certain mainstream institutions — is the notion that any form of criticism of Israel can never be classified as antisemitism. This is a dangerous and misinformed idea, which underlies the spread of hate that we have witnessed since October 7. The most extreme manifestation of this was the rationalization or outright denial of the barbaric Hamas massacre of October 7. This attack — the largest massacre of Jews since the Holocaust — was supposedly framed in terms of legitimate resistance to Israeli policies. In other words, nothing Israel could do to defend itself is defensible.
While the distortion embodied in these justifications for the murder of 1,200 Israelis, the rape of scores of women, the taking of more than 200 hostages is so obvious, it wasn’t the most perilous form. Even a person with hostile views toward the Jewish State could see through the immorality of justifying one of the worst acts of terrorism since 9/11.
Far more dangerous, because of its respectability, is the concept that no criticism of Israel can ever be antisemitism. This is often expressed with phrases like, “we don’t hate Jews, we hate Zionism.” And those sources — such as the ADL — which identify areas where hostility toward Israel can be a form of antisemitism and a generator of antisemitic incidents, are treated as biased and unreliable by Wikipedia and other groups and publications.
In fact, the manifestations of anti-Israel activity and the explosion of anti-Jewish behavior in a multitude of areas of society cannot be separated from classical antisemitism.
Jews were demonized for centuries — from being accused as “Christ killers,” to charges of blood libels and murders of children for ritual purposes, to sinister conspiracy theories as embodied in the fraudulent Protocols of the Learned Elders of Zion document, which accuses Jewish leaders of plotting to take over the world.
All of this deeply embedded hatred culminated in the Holocaust, the Nazis’ systematic murder of two-thirds of the Jews of Europe.
After the horrors of the Nazi extermination of the Jewish people, outright Jew-hatred was stigmatized — but millennia of prejudice against the Jewish people did not suddenly disappear. Over time, it transformed itself into something more legitimate: hatred of the only Jewish state in the world.
To those who cared, like Dr. Martin Luther King Jr., it was obvious that delegitimizing the Jewish State was merely a post-Holocaust form of antisemitism.
While these ideas existed for decades, it was October 7 that gave them new life. Beyond the rationalization of the Hamas terrorism itself, the anti-Israel protests on campuses were characterized by classic demonization and delegitimization of the Jewish State and its Jewish supporters.
Denial of the fundamental right of the Jewish state to exist — as embodied in the popular protest phrase, “From the river to the sea” — is along the historic lines of delegitimizing Jews through conspiracy theories.
Demonization of the Jewish State through denying what Hamas did, or justifying or labeling Israel’s struggle to defend itself after the worst day since the Holocaust as genocide — or accusing Israel of deliberately targeting children, in the spirit of blood libel charges — are only some of the ways in which expressions have not been mere criticism of Israel.
And the effect of all this — the attacks on Jews on campuses and elsewhere — was highly predictable. Hate speech, whether from the right, the left, or Islamist, inevitably leads to hate incidents.
In deeming ADL reporting as “unreliable,” this subset of Wikipedia’s editors has ignored all these forms of antisemitism that have emerged over the last eight months. For us, we will continue to do our work, always recognizing the distinction between free speech and criticism of Israeli policies and the demonization and delegitimization of the Jewish state, which fits into the pattern of historic antisemitism.
It is important that leaders in society make clear that they know what’s going on here — that it’s exactly this kind of thinking that has produced the opportunity for antisemitism to openly raise its ugly head in a way that we haven’t seen for decades. If people don’t confront the reality, this hatred — legitimized by mainstream sources — will spread and create even greater dangers for American Jews and American society.
The first step in standing up against this spreading support for hate is to express support for the International Holocaust Remembrance Alliance’s Working Definition of Antisemitism, which articulates when legitimate criticism of Israel becomes antisemitism.
Ken Jacobson is Associate National Director of ADL.
The post Wikipedia’s Serious Problem: Bias Against Israel first appeared on Algemeiner.com.
RSS
Members of Mahmoud Abbas’ Fatah Party Say Jews Cannot Live in Israel
People hold Fatah flags during a protest in support of the people of Gaza, as the conflict between Israel and Hamas continues, in Hebron, in the West Bank, Oct. 27, 2023. Photo: REUTERS/Mussa Qawasma
Whoever thinks the current war is an isolated conflict in the Gaza Strip — think again. The war is being cheered by members of Palestinian Authority (PA) President Mahmoud Abbas’ political party, Fatah, as leading to a “return to Acre, Jaffa, and Haifa.”
In other words, “from the river to the sea, Palestine will be free.”
One Fatah member stated recently what Palestinian Media Watch (PMW) has documented for decades — that the conflict with Israel is not over land, but much more. It is “existential, not just a conflict over borders.”
Fatah Revolutionary Council member Muhammad Al-Lahham: “This is my opinion as [a member of] Fatah: That my conflict against this occupation [i.e., Israel] is an existential conflict, not just a conflict over borders. It’s either me or him on this land.”
[Al-Arabiya TV (Saudi Arabia), Facebook page, June 15, 2024]
Another top member and official of Fatah, Nablus Branch Secretary Muhammad Hamdan, said that Palestinians dying in the war in Gaza serve as “fuel” for the Palestinian “return,” and taking over of all of Israel. As he put it, Israel is “transient”:
Fatah Nablus Branch Secretary Muhammad Hamdan: “We say to the entire world that this blood that is being shed will be the fuel for our return to Acre, Jaffa, and Haifa, and certainly the Israeli occupation is transient and indeed the State of Palestine will be established, whether the occupation [i.e., Israel] and this world want it or not. All this national and mass activity emphasizes that we are returning, whether the occupation wants it or not.”
[Official PA TV, May 15, 2024]
The Palestinian Authority’s Ministry of Education showed a map and worded it as explicitly as possible on its Facebook page: “Palestine — the entire land is ours, from the [Mediterranean] Sea to the [Jordan] River”
Facebook, PA Ministry of Education, Nov. 16, 2021
This echoes many similar statements before it by other top Fatah and PA officials, such as Fatah Revolutionary Council Secretary Majed Al-Fatiani, who said that all the “transients” who came to “Palestine” must return “to where they came from,” and that only the Palestinians will have “sovereignty” over the land:
Fatah Revolutionary Council Secretary Majed Al-Fatiani: “There will be no sovereignty over this land except for the Palestinians … even if there is a foreign and transient case as the transients who came in the history of Palestine and returned to where they came from… [The Israelis] must understand that Palestine between the [Mediterranean] Sea and the [Jordan] River – every Palestinian man and woman has a right to it, and we will pursue them to take this right … Every year a generation arises among us that says: My home is in Jaffa, my home is in Tantura, my home is in the Upper Galilee, in Al-Bassa, in Lod, my home is in Ramle, Umm Al-Rashrash [i.e., Eilat; all the places are in Israel], and everywhere.”
[Fatah-run Awdah TV, Special Coverage, May 29, 2022]
The idea of Israel as a colonial “implant” and “a temporary ruler” is expressed in the following video, which was broadcast by official PA TV hundreds of times for almost a decade. It shows the rise and defeat of different rulers in “Palestine” over time. It ends with Israel’s defeat and the arrival of a “new” Muslim conqueror, Saladin, who defeated the Crusaders, thus representing the coming Muslim savior who will “liberate Palestine” from Jewish-Israeli rule:
The author is a senior analyst at Palestinian Media Watch, where a version of this article was originally published.
The post Members of Mahmoud Abbas’ Fatah Party Say Jews Cannot Live in Israel first appeared on Algemeiner.com.
RSS
Did Jamaal Bowman Primary Bring AOC & Nick Fuentes Together?
US Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D-NY) speaks during a press conference on Capitol Hill in Washington, DC, on March 21, 2024. Photo: Craig Hudson/Sipa USA via Reuters Connect
Far-right white supremacist Nick Fuentes recently found common ground with progressive New York Democrat Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (AOC), taunting her with their political and ideological “similarities.” And the Internet caught fire.
What started as Ocasio-Cortez’s distaste for “big money” election spending ended with an exchange that Fuentes created to match her with anti-Israel rhetoric.
While it is evident that both Fuentes and Ocasio-Cortez are clearly anti-Israel, one accepted definition of antisemitism would also indicate that their rhetoric and their actions in turn make them both antisemitic.
AOC is more America First than 99% of Republicans. https://t.co/VDgdMZr4N6
— Nicholas J. Fuentes (@NickJFuentes) June 19, 2024
No matter how hard she tries, AOC cannot separate herself from being associated with Jew-haters. Her standpoint appears to be mainly made of ignorance, angelic naïveté, and her alliance with two of the most antisemitic Congresswomen, Ilan Omar (D-MN) and Rashida Tlaib (D-MI).
Now, Fuentes has managed to rile her up in one tweet and expose their similarities. Fuentes, of course, is an open antisemite and white supremacist.
You are a white supremacist and I want nothing to do with you nor the world you imagine. I believe in a multiracial democracy, one of economic rights, civil liberties, and that affirms the working class and the rights of women and LGBTQ+ people.
These are not small differences.…
— Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (@AOC) June 20, 2024
But that is exactly the point, polar-opposites of the spectrum are supposedly adversaries in their values. Yet extremes on either side are like a horseshoe spectrum — they meet at the bottom where the ends almost touch.
As for the “most expensive primary” that AOC criticized, Jamaal Bowman (D-NY) suffered a resounding defeat. He also did so in a way that singled out the Jewish community. And despite critics’ claims, the results also proved what HonestReporting wrote: this primary race was about more than “the Benjamins.”
A beloved county-executive and more moderate Democrat, George Latimer won 58.6% of the vote, and his voters were motivated by many issues. However, The New York Times put out a disturbing headline, later changing it amid criticism.
Actually, @nytimes, there was far more to it than “the Benjamins,” as we made clear the day before Bowman’s defeat. https://t.co/rhyGHVDv94 https://t.co/sTdLl8aWNT
— HonestReporting (@HonestReporting) June 26, 2024
Hmmm seems @nytimes thought better of their headline placing the blame for Bowman’s loss on the Jews, oops I mean “pro-Israel money.” https://t.co/k5PvLFrvwi pic.twitter.com/DB4sc2YVGy
— Dr. Laura Shaw Frank (@shawfrank) June 26, 2024
Of course, the Jewish people will be blamed for this “upset.” And not just by AOC.
Many allies of Fuentes and KKK leader David Duke also blamed the result on Jews. One former UFC fighter took to X to blame “Israel” for meddling in elections. He made the mistake of retweeting a post referencing Jewish people.
Once again, we often see that anti-Zionism is antisemitism.
The author is a contributor to HonestReporting, a Jerusalem-based media watchdog with a focus on antisemitism and anti-Israel bias — where a version of this article first appeared.
The post Did Jamaal Bowman Primary Bring AOC & Nick Fuentes Together? first appeared on Algemeiner.com.