"Who is a Jew?" once went a line in comedy. Answer: The person who has Jewish grandchildren.
But, jokes aside, American Jews and their values are under threat as never before. To understand this it helps to have a point of reference and our Jewish cousins in Canada help us here very nicely. "The Canadian Jewish community (nearing 400,000, now ranks as the fourth largest in the world, after Israel, the United States, and France".) This per Michael Medved writing in the Nov. '13 issue of Commentary. By many common metrics - ritual observance, visits to Israel, Jewish education, marrying other Jews, etc. - Canadian Jews are more Jewish than American Jews.
Medved suggests this might be because the Canadian Jews are less assimilated than American Jews. The Canadian Jewish families came to their country some 30 or 40 years later than typical American clans (This is in part because Canada remained more open to Jewish refugees in the days just before the Holocaust.) Today, one in every four Canadian Jews was born abroad. In the U.S., that figure is one in ten.
A reported 74 % of Canadian Jews have visited Israel. Less than a third of American Jews have made this trip. "It makes sense that those who view traveling to Jerusalem as a personal priority will also prove more likely to consider support for Israel an important factor" in their various political decisions.
Then too the environment in which Canadian Jews find themselves is more threatening than what American Jews find here in America. In Canada, Muslims make up more than 3 percent of the electorate (nearly 4 times their percentage of the presidential vote in the U.S. in 2012). Since Muslims amount to less than 1% of the U.S. population, American Jews can more easily disregard the political role of Islamic communities.
There is one other aspect to this comparison of American Jews and Canadian Jews worthy of note and that is the Evangelical Christian factor. Despite their proven record of support for Israel, American Jews are generally very fearful of the Evangelicals. It can be argued that this helps explain why Ronald Reagan, the most ardently Zionist president to that point in history, lost 67% of Jewish voters to Walter Mondale in '84. Reagan enjoyed the massive support of the Evangelicals.
Fear of Christian power and influence helped guarantee that leaders like Reagan and the second Bush would find their love for the Jewish people unrequited. But to Canadian Jews, Evangelical Christians are far less threatening. In Canada, they make up less than 7% of the population. (In America, 26% of the people queried in exit polls after the '12 presidential elections identified themselves as "as white evangelical or born-again Christians.")
The irony is that in Canada, their Prime Minister, Harper, is an Evangelical. He is also one of Israel's staunchest defenders. As a Jew, let me suggest that perhaps we American Jews might want to reconsider our position regarding Evangelicals.
Sunday, December 29, 2013
Tuesday, December 17, 2013
Anti-Semitism Comes To America
Sure, we've seen anti-Semitism before. But it wasn't official. In the early days of America, anti-Semitism was decisively rejected by George Washington. It is true that during WW II America's State Department was peopled by individuals who didn't like Jews and stifled all efforts to save them as they were being consumed by the Holocaust. Today, however, we find something very different.
Today, Jews are attacked for their association with Israel. Anyone favoring Israel is a supporter of a Nazi regime, a supporter of an apartheid nation. We are charged with supporting a nation that occupies lands that don't belong to it. These attacks are channeled through the BDS (boycott Israel, divest from Israel, and sanction Israel) movement. What's really scary is that this movement has had a degree of success.
On December 16, 2013, the NY Times reported on a vote taken by the American Studies Association to isolate Israel and promote an academic boycott of Israel. Let me take this article and point to shameful behavior which it describes, starting at the end of the article. There it reads, "In May, the physicist Stephen W. Hawking withdrew from a conference in Israel in support of the boycott." Really? And, where did Mr. Hawking learn anything about Israel? And, where did he learn about the Palestinians? And, is he aware that the Jewish recipe for matzos never included the blood of Christian children?
"In Britain, in 2002, two academic journals fired two Israeli professors from their boards because of their nationality."
"The American Association of University Professors (AAUP), with 48,000 members, has reiterated its stance against academic boycotts, which it says, 'strikes directly at the free exchange of ideas,' and not at those responsible for oppression, stifling precisely the kind of interaction that would aid human rights. The association has noted that during the apartheid era, it backed economic boycotts of South Africa, but not academic ones."
Can a Jew take solace from the AAUP explanation as to why why the AAUP stands against the academic boycott of Israel? Certainly, not I. The AAUP suggests that a boycott such as that promoted by the BDS fails to strike against those responsible for oppression and would fail to aid human rights.
What a lot of convoluted nonsense! Who is it that is responsible for oppression in the Israel-Palestinian dispute? It is Hamas in Gaza as it oppresses its people; not Israel. And, is the situation any different in the West Bank where the PA grossly overstates its just dues and historically has launched terrorist actions that have created almost as much as animosity toward them by Israelis, as the animosity towards Israelis which the Palestinians drill daily into the minds of Palestinian children. As to human rights, I would be proud to compare Israel's record with that of the Palestinians.
Let's now end our review of this article by going further to the front where it says, "(Curtis Marez president of the American Studies Association and its almost 5000 members) did not dispute that many nations, including many of Israel's neighbors, are generally judged to have human rights records that are worse than Israel's or comparable, but he said, 'we have to start somewhere.' "
Interesting. It's like saying that family services have to begin working on spousal abuse -- somehow, somewhere. So what does family services do? They begin by locking up spouses who use strong language to their spouses and leave until some later date families who have practiced honor killing. Curtis Marez makes no sense. But, then anti-Semitism never does.
Today, Jews are attacked for their association with Israel. Anyone favoring Israel is a supporter of a Nazi regime, a supporter of an apartheid nation. We are charged with supporting a nation that occupies lands that don't belong to it. These attacks are channeled through the BDS (boycott Israel, divest from Israel, and sanction Israel) movement. What's really scary is that this movement has had a degree of success.
On December 16, 2013, the NY Times reported on a vote taken by the American Studies Association to isolate Israel and promote an academic boycott of Israel. Let me take this article and point to shameful behavior which it describes, starting at the end of the article. There it reads, "In May, the physicist Stephen W. Hawking withdrew from a conference in Israel in support of the boycott." Really? And, where did Mr. Hawking learn anything about Israel? And, where did he learn about the Palestinians? And, is he aware that the Jewish recipe for matzos never included the blood of Christian children?
"In Britain, in 2002, two academic journals fired two Israeli professors from their boards because of their nationality."
"The American Association of University Professors (AAUP), with 48,000 members, has reiterated its stance against academic boycotts, which it says, 'strikes directly at the free exchange of ideas,' and not at those responsible for oppression, stifling precisely the kind of interaction that would aid human rights. The association has noted that during the apartheid era, it backed economic boycotts of South Africa, but not academic ones."
Can a Jew take solace from the AAUP explanation as to why why the AAUP stands against the academic boycott of Israel? Certainly, not I. The AAUP suggests that a boycott such as that promoted by the BDS fails to strike against those responsible for oppression and would fail to aid human rights.
What a lot of convoluted nonsense! Who is it that is responsible for oppression in the Israel-Palestinian dispute? It is Hamas in Gaza as it oppresses its people; not Israel. And, is the situation any different in the West Bank where the PA grossly overstates its just dues and historically has launched terrorist actions that have created almost as much as animosity toward them by Israelis, as the animosity towards Israelis which the Palestinians drill daily into the minds of Palestinian children. As to human rights, I would be proud to compare Israel's record with that of the Palestinians.
Let's now end our review of this article by going further to the front where it says, "(Curtis Marez president of the American Studies Association and its almost 5000 members) did not dispute that many nations, including many of Israel's neighbors, are generally judged to have human rights records that are worse than Israel's or comparable, but he said, 'we have to start somewhere.' "
Interesting. It's like saying that family services have to begin working on spousal abuse -- somehow, somewhere. So what does family services do? They begin by locking up spouses who use strong language to their spouses and leave until some later date families who have practiced honor killing. Curtis Marez makes no sense. But, then anti-Semitism never does.
Friday, December 6, 2013
Mandela and Arafat
The world mourns the passing of Nelson Mandela as well it should. He freed his black county men from their apartheid rulers and did so in a manner that made possible a reconciliation between blacks and whites. While the reconciliation wasn't perfect, it was better than could have been expected.
I find, however, one short coming in the vision of Mandela and that is in his inability to distinguish between personal relationships and national interests. Three of Mandela's greatest friends were Arafat, Gadhafi, and Castro. And, those personal affinities are perfectly understandable.
Mandela's friendship to Gadhafi is the easiest to understand. Providing Mandela with his greatest support were the Soviet Union and the Arab states. But, among these states, it was Gadhafi who probably supplied the most money needed to wage the war against apartheid. Of course, Gadhafi also supplied funds to other Africans such as Zimbabwe's Mugabe. It was part of Gadhafi's plan to create a united Africa. The fact that Gadhafi ran a dictatorship, or that he supported the likes of Mugabe didn't matter. And, that's understandable. Upending a state, as entrenched as was the apartheid state of South Africa, isn't easy. When a friend like Gadhafi shows up, you don't check too carefully as to how he runs his country. In Mandela's own words, "We have no time to look into the internal affairs of other countries."
And that pretty much explains his relationship to Castro. This was a time of the cold war and Mandela's support came from the Soviets and their allies. Castro's entry into the Angola conflict is also relevant. Here the fight was between U.S. and South African backed proxies and Russian backed proxies. Ultimately, the Cuban military forces and the South African military forces left Angola to the Angolans. The South Africa of that time was the apartheid South Africa, so one begins to understand Mandela's warm relationship with Castro.
As to Arafat, he served as the man representing Arab interests. That was after Nasser of Egypt made him the official spokesperson and leader of the Palestinians. And, that was after Egypt's defeat in the Yom Kippur War. With Arab support for Mandela, Arafat emerged as one of his best friends. There were both similarities and sharp differences in the nature of these two men. Both struggled against superior forces and both were designated as terrorists. However, it should be noted that Mandela was seeking equal treatment within his country. South Africa was to remain South Africa. It was only apartheid that was to be removed.
In the case of Israel, its place among nations had been established by the UN with positive votes cast by a majority of nations, including the Soviet Union. Efforts to have Israel live in peace with the Palestinians failed only because of the refusal of Arab nations to recognize the new state. And, indeed, they launched several wars against it.. Only after the Arab nations conceded the defeat of their armies did they hand over to Arafat their continuing effort to destroy Israel.
It is clear to any objective observer that the failure of the Palestinians to gain statehood has been entirely of their own doing. By now, working in harmony with all their neighbors, including Israel, Palestine might have become a prosperous and advanced nation. It's not the Jews who held them back, but rather their allies in the Muslim world who find working with Jews to be an anathema. How sad when one considers that in Israel, street signs are written in both Hebrew and Arabic.
What the Arabs are now trying to do is conflate the Palestinian desire to bury Israel with Mandela's work in eliminating apartheid. But, in fact, there is no apartheid in Israel for anyone to eliminate. Israel's protective barrier the Palestinians argue hems them in. But clearly it has kept terrorists from blowing up Israeli busses and killing members of the Israeli public. Had the Palestinians made peace with Israel, there would have been no need to erect this barrier. It's in Gaza and the West Bank with its family clans that establishing a peace with the Jewish State of Israel seems a bridge too far.
I find, however, one short coming in the vision of Mandela and that is in his inability to distinguish between personal relationships and national interests. Three of Mandela's greatest friends were Arafat, Gadhafi, and Castro. And, those personal affinities are perfectly understandable.
Mandela's friendship to Gadhafi is the easiest to understand. Providing Mandela with his greatest support were the Soviet Union and the Arab states. But, among these states, it was Gadhafi who probably supplied the most money needed to wage the war against apartheid. Of course, Gadhafi also supplied funds to other Africans such as Zimbabwe's Mugabe. It was part of Gadhafi's plan to create a united Africa. The fact that Gadhafi ran a dictatorship, or that he supported the likes of Mugabe didn't matter. And, that's understandable. Upending a state, as entrenched as was the apartheid state of South Africa, isn't easy. When a friend like Gadhafi shows up, you don't check too carefully as to how he runs his country. In Mandela's own words, "We have no time to look into the internal affairs of other countries."
And that pretty much explains his relationship to Castro. This was a time of the cold war and Mandela's support came from the Soviets and their allies. Castro's entry into the Angola conflict is also relevant. Here the fight was between U.S. and South African backed proxies and Russian backed proxies. Ultimately, the Cuban military forces and the South African military forces left Angola to the Angolans. The South Africa of that time was the apartheid South Africa, so one begins to understand Mandela's warm relationship with Castro.
As to Arafat, he served as the man representing Arab interests. That was after Nasser of Egypt made him the official spokesperson and leader of the Palestinians. And, that was after Egypt's defeat in the Yom Kippur War. With Arab support for Mandela, Arafat emerged as one of his best friends. There were both similarities and sharp differences in the nature of these two men. Both struggled against superior forces and both were designated as terrorists. However, it should be noted that Mandela was seeking equal treatment within his country. South Africa was to remain South Africa. It was only apartheid that was to be removed.
In the case of Israel, its place among nations had been established by the UN with positive votes cast by a majority of nations, including the Soviet Union. Efforts to have Israel live in peace with the Palestinians failed only because of the refusal of Arab nations to recognize the new state. And, indeed, they launched several wars against it.. Only after the Arab nations conceded the defeat of their armies did they hand over to Arafat their continuing effort to destroy Israel.
It is clear to any objective observer that the failure of the Palestinians to gain statehood has been entirely of their own doing. By now, working in harmony with all their neighbors, including Israel, Palestine might have become a prosperous and advanced nation. It's not the Jews who held them back, but rather their allies in the Muslim world who find working with Jews to be an anathema. How sad when one considers that in Israel, street signs are written in both Hebrew and Arabic.
What the Arabs are now trying to do is conflate the Palestinian desire to bury Israel with Mandela's work in eliminating apartheid. But, in fact, there is no apartheid in Israel for anyone to eliminate. Israel's protective barrier the Palestinians argue hems them in. But clearly it has kept terrorists from blowing up Israeli busses and killing members of the Israeli public. Had the Palestinians made peace with Israel, there would have been no need to erect this barrier. It's in Gaza and the West Bank with its family clans that establishing a peace with the Jewish State of Israel seems a bridge too far.
Wednesday, December 4, 2013
Yes, Virginia, Anti-Semitism Exists And Is Alive And Well
Anti-Semitism? Really? How can you say you're being discriminated against? Are you maligned? Are you set upon? It doesn't seem so. Not in America. If you are a Jewish medical school graduate with appropriate grades, chances are you'll have no difficulty finding a residency. Nor will you generally have difficulty finding a job if you have a good education; or, at least, no greater difficulty than a person who is not Jewish. You may be considered a bit pushy, but that's a plus if you're a smart lawyer. Can you find a golf club that will deny you membership? Maybe, but I don't know of any.
Yes, a vein of anti-Semitism once gushed through America's body politic. Consider, however, that America also had periods of anti-Irish sentiment, anti-Italian sentiment, and, of course, the infamous Jim Crow attitudes towards African-Americans.
But, today, what hostility we find between Jews and other groups is based mainly on socio-economic differences. In neighborhoods in Brooklyn where orthodox Jews live in close proximity to African-Americans you may find divisive attitudes. When one group is further down in terms of socio-economics than another, you may well find a certain hostility.
On the whole, however, we find there to be little anti-Semitism in America today. So what's the worry all about? It's about the concern we have for our brothers and sisters living in parts of the world far more hostile to Jews. I'm not talking about the Congo, or Zimbabwe. I'm talking about Europe, I'm talking about the Middle East, and I'm talking about places like South Africa. We tend not to worry much about anti-Semitism in Africa, because there aren't a great many Jews there. (South Africa is an exception. I would add that not only will you find Jews there, but that many of these Jews were in the forefront of the fight to end apartheid.)
Be that as it may, you find in South Africa, the preacher, Reverend Tutu, accusing Israel of practicing apartheid. This is especially shameful, because Tutu, more than anyone, should know what apartheid is. Let me explain: it was the discrimination of black South Africans within their own country. They were denied participation in the political life of their country by being relegated to areas within South Africa where they were denied educational opportunities and services provided to white South Africans. They were also denied the vote. That, most certainly, is not, nor has it ever been, a picture of Israel.
Let's face it, while Jews today are scattered around the world, most of us Jews are found in Israel and in the United States. Sure, the Europeans do have their Jewish populations, but, frankly, they're small in number. And, yet, we find Europeans beleaguering their Jews. They are now assaulting the Jewish religious ritual of Brit Milah (circumcision), a ritual practiced by Jews for thousands of years. Then too you have the assault on Shechita, the ritual slaughter of Kosher animals.
Israel has always played fair. It was never a place you'd confuse with South Africa. When the Arab armies attacked the Jews, most Arabs sought to get out of the way. In some places, such as Lod, which harbored Jordanian troops, and where the Arabs took up arms against the Jews, such Arabs were indeed forced to leave. (By some irony, the Jews who were forced to leave their homes in Egypt, Iraq and other Arab lands, equaled in number the Palestinian Arab refugees.
Today, Arabs who number roughly 20% of all Israelis enjoy the same rights as do Jews, Indeed, they have one special privilege; namely, they are not required to do national service in the military.
To refer to Israel as an apartheid state is nothing less than slander.
Today, attacking Jews head-on is not seen by anti-Semitic activists as being effective. Far better, they find, is to undermine specific Jewish targets including their precious Jewish state. To this end, they seek soft targets; namely, Israel's commerce with other nations, Israel's standing in international forums, its standing in the world of entertainment, and in academia and on campuses throughout the world. In short, anti-Semitism has moved from agitating among the lumpen proletariat (to use communist jargon) to agitating among the world's social elites.
Today's anti-Semitism is sleek and modern. It's far more sophisticated than in the good old days of inquisitions and church inspired pogroms. That all happened a long time ago when the Church could not forgive the Jews for not signing on to Christian theology. Jews then went on to disappoint Martin Luther. He figured that after what the Jews had suffered under the Roman Catholic Church, they'd be flocking to his Protestantism. When that didn't happen't, he gave them the back of his pastoral hand and joined the oversubscribed ranks of anti-Semites.
When discussing anti-Semitism, we find we must pause at the Holocaust. Here was anti-Semitism on steroids. It called for special chambers to be built. It called for a special poisonous gas. And, it didn't end there. Special ovens were needed to get rid of the mountains of corpses produced by the, oh, so efficient gasing. It's not that the anti-Semites had given up on plain, old bullets, or the use of CO produced by truck exhausts, or simply starving Jews to death. They did that too. But, the gas chambers represented a scientific advance in genocide on a scale that has yet to be matched.
So what were the Jews charged with back then? It was their lack of racial purity. The Germans seem to have forgotten that Jewish soldiers had fought valiantly, shoulder-to-shoulder in the first World War (WW I) with Christian Germans. The big lie hammered home time and again by the Nazis was that all the ills that had befallen Germany were the fault of the Jews. It was the Jews who had caused Germany to lose the war. It was Jews who had brought down on Germany the disastrous Versailles document that had set forth the conditions of German surrender after WW I. It was the Jews who were responsible for the Great Depression that had also fallen on Germany.
These new allegations seem to have overridden the older anti-Semitic allegations of Jews having killed Christ. (Note: Some Christians continue to make this allegation. No surprise there, when this falsehood can be ound on the pages of the Christian's New Testament?) At about this time, Czarist anti-Semites put forth the Protocol of the Elders of Zion which set forth the plans of the Jews for dominating the world. From Czarist Russia also came the noxious allegation that Jews killed Christian children for their blood needed to make matzos.
Some of these charges, crazy as they may be, have persisted to this day. Jews continue to be charged with controlling the media. They are still charged with controlling the world's banks. And, they are still charged with controlling America's politicians. But, now with the establishment of the State of Israel, anti-Semites have added new allegation to their long list of Jewish "crimes." The new charges center on their mistreatment of Palestinians. They allege that Israel has stolen the land of the Arabs and expelled Palestinians from their homes. Also, they find that Israel casually murders Palestinian men, women, and children. Add to that, that they are an apartheid nation.
Refuting these charges helps little. No amount of contrary evidence will ever convince an anti-Semite that Jews really don't control the banks, that they really don't control the world's politics, and that they really don't control the media. For those who may have forgotten, here is a quick listing of the facts:
1. Israel was granted statehood by the UN, just as the UN granted the Arabs their portion of Palestine.
The Arab nations refused to accept the UN's decision. The best trained army in the Middle East, thanks to the British, was the Jordanian army. They were joined by the Egyptian army, the Iraqi army, and the Syrian army in attacking what became the State of Israel.
2. At the root of the conflict was the role played by outsiders. Pan national Arab refusal to accept the fact of Israel's statehood let to a number of wars. They attacked in '48, they fought Israel again in the Six-Day War ('67), and they attacked Israel in the Yom Kippur War ('73). (Note: It was apparent from preparations made in Egypt, Jordan, and Syria that the Arab states were about to launch an attack on Israel in '67. Israel, realizing that the Jewish state might well be obliterated if the Arabs gained air superiority, preemptively destroyed the Egyptian air force as Egypt's planes sat on their landing strips. Rebuked by western nations for having struck preemptively, they did not do so in '73, even though military intelligence informed them of impending attacks by the Arab nations. Israel survived, but at a cost far greater than would have been the case if they had taken preemptive action.)
3. The PLO was not created until 1964. It was an organization conceived by Arab states in the course of the first Arab summit (the Arab League summit in Cairo in '64). The original PLO Charter stated, "Palestine with its boundaries that existed at the time of the British mandate is an integral regional unit" and sought to "prohibit . . . the existence and activity" of Zionism. It is interesting to note that the first leader of the newly created PLO was Yasser Arafat, an Egyptian. Based on the mountains of money Arafat secreted in Swiss banks for his family in the course of his reign, we can see that being a leader of the PLO has its rewards.
4. As to the apartheid charge: Human rights are respected in Israel for members of all religions including Muslims. It would be nice if we could say the same for Muslim countries. In Israel all people and that includes gays and people of color enjoy equal rights.
5. As to the expulsion of Arabs from Israel: For the most part and at the urging of the surrounding Arab nations, a great number of Arabs left Israel so as not to get killed in the cross fire. A small number of Arabs were indeed forced to leave Israel as a result of their taking arms against the Jews. However, some Arabs decided to stay put. Those Arabs now enjoy the same rights as all Israeli citizens. Most Arabs are Muslims, but a good number are Christians and Druze as well as members of other religions.
6. Displacement of Arabs: Determining ownership of land in pre-Israel Palestine required searching through land records kept in Turkey (a legacy of the Ottoman Empire.) Israelis have been scrupulous in settling only lands not owned by Arabs. (Note: Land in the West Bank was owned by either the state or by private parties. State owned land, which later reverted to Jordan, can be claimed by Israel as losses incurred by Jordan for waging war against Israel.)
7. What injustice, unquestionably done to Palestinian Arabs of the Muslim faith, has been done to them by their fellow Muslims. The Jews thrown out of their Jewish homes throughout Arab lands were resettled in Israel. Other peoples thrown from their homes throughout the span of history have always managed to get resettled. This goes for Greeks tossed out of Turkey, Turks tossed out of Greece, Germans tossed out of Czechoslovakia, and on and on. Only the Palestinians have been refused the opportunity to integrate into other lands. Citizenship was denied them by Lebanon, by Syria, by Iraq, by Egypt and so on. And, indeed, the UN has been complicit in allowing this unjust behavior to persist.
So much for the facts. Listing them will do little to end anti-Semitism. It's instructive however to look at the areas being targeted by anti-Semites.
Commerce
Caterpillar has been targeted by BDS (the group agitating for boycotting Israel, divesting from Israel and sanctioning Israel) for supplying earth moving equipment to Israel. TIAA-CREF, a major investor, did drop Caterpillar from its investment portfolio, but they did so because TIAA-CREF had found fault with Caterpillar's position regarding a union issue.
Veolia, a Paris based water and water waste systems/construction company and a transportation systems company removed itself from contention for work on the Jerusalem Light Rail project. lobbying against Veolia by BDS, as well as a human rights suit brought against the company in France, may have prompted Veolia to withdraw from a Sacramento, CA project. Note: Saudi Arabia had no problem providing Veolia with one of their lucrative project.
Olympia Food Coop in Washington State, in 2010, became the first American food chain to boycott Israeli goods. (It is important for all Jews to become aware of this situation and do a bit of research as to what happened here. Only then can one fully appreciate the invidious nature of BDS and the professionalism they bring in their attacks on Israeli interests.)
Max Brenner, a wholly owned subsidiary of Strauss Group, and a business developed by two Israelis has been under severe attack by BDS, especially in Australia.
SodaStream, boycotted by BDS experienced a fourth quarter, anti-SodaStream event at a Superbowl Sunday promotion in 2013. The efforts to injure SodaStream by BDS have happily been a failure judging by the continuing growth and profitability of this Israeli company. SodaStream has at least three plants, one of which is in Maale Adumim. The plants employ hundreds of Palestinians as well as Israelis. The employees word together and eat together in friendship. It has driven the BDS people crazy.
SEIU Local 721 is touted as an ally by the BDS people. And that may well be true. However, I was unable to find any connection or agreement on basic principals between this union representing government workers of Southern California and the BDS people. Note: BDS was rejected by AFL CIO President Richard Trumka.
These BDS efforts make clear that business connections favorable to Israel should anticipate BDS attacks. These attacks will very likely prove to be sophisticated and well funded. However, even Arab oil money only goes so far. And, its efforts have only garnered it only limited success.
Entertainers
Dustin Hoffman, Carlos Santana, Elvis Costello, Stevie Wonder, and Snoop Dogg are among those entertainers who, either have never visited Israel professionally, or who have demonstrated an overt hostility to Israel. Perhaps the greatest stars among the Israel bashers are Harry Belafonte, Alice Walker, and Emma Thompson.
So what gives? How did Israel become a villian in the minds of these celebrities? There are a number of possibilities. In the case of black performers, they appear to have conflated the history of African-Americans with that of the Palestinians. That the two narratives have almost nothing in common seems to make no difference to black anti-Semites. In the case of slavery, it was in large measure African Muslims who went into the depths of Africa to hunt down Africans to sell to slave ship captains. Enslaving blacks has a long history among Muslims of the Middle East. Roughly 8% of African slaves were shipped to America. (48% went to Brazil and roughly 44% were distributed among the nations of the Caribbean.) White men fought to keep America's slaves enslaved. But, white men also fought to end slavery. What then followed was Jim Crow.
But what does that dismal history have to do with the Israelis? Are the Ethiopians rescued by Israel from Islamic Ethiopia any less black than America's African-Americans?
Today we find Islamists using the Palestinians to continue their war on Israel. They phony up photos to show Israeli soldiers shooting Palestinian children. Never mind that these photos were clearly Photoshopped and show whatever serves the purposes of the Muslim leadership.
Go figure. Maybe Alice Walker took exception to Sammy Davis's conversion. Maybe she was ill-served by a Jewish lawyer or a Jewish agent. Who knows? Does it matter? The Nazis had Richard Wagner. Today's anti-Semites have Harry Belafonte. I believe that of the two, Wagner's music will have greater staying power.
Academia and college campuses
Endorsing Islamic chairs at universities throughout America has paid off big time for oil rich Islamic nations. How can Jewish youth argue with an anti-Semitic professor or an anti-Semitic thesis advisor? Less understandable is why grants from the U.S. Government are often found supporting Islamic propaganda.
So how to explain the anti-Israel sentiments of Stephen Hawking? But, then, how is one to explain the moral obtuseness of Heisenberg or the active anti-Semitism of Johannas Stark or Philipp Lenard, both supporters of Nazi mythology. Yet, both were Nobel class scientists.
Churches
Among Protestants, we find several puzzles. First, in the West Bank, we have the renown anti-Semite, Rev. Naim Ateek of the Sabeel Ecumenical Liberation Theology Center in Jerusalem, and author of the infamous book, Justice and Only Justice, A Palestinian Theology of Liberation, 1989. Yet the Christian population has been sharply declining in the Palestinian territories from 15% in 1950 to under 2% today. This due to Muslim persecution. I would guess that the price for this Christian Judas has been considerably greater than 13 pieces of gold.
Yet among Presbyterians, Episcopalians and other "high" Christian churches, the Rev. Ateek is a rock star. How does that figure? I've heard two theories. First, it's possible, I suppose, that these churches have actually swallowed the anti-Semitic Palestinian propaganda. More likely is the second hypothesis; namely, that because of falling membership, these churches are reaching out for something to reinvigorate their followers. When America fought for the equal rights of African-Americans, these churches did great work. They rolled up their sleeves and entered the fray. And, to their credit, they fought valiantly against the evil that was Jim Crow. These were also the days of protests against the war in Vietnam. This was a war that everyone hated and spurred the retirement of LBJ. Here again. the high Protestant churches could be found in the forefront of many of the demonstrations.
But, what crusade can they now fight to reinvigorate and revitalize their followers? Why, of course, the occupation and colonization of the Palestinians by Israel. The story line here is, of course, nonsense and could easily be refuted in open and honest debates. But, it seems to be the hope of these churches that fighting in behalf of the Palestinian cause will once again fill up their depleted pews. They may also believe that in following the Palestinian's noxious mirage they are demonstrating their superiority to the Evangelical upstarts whose membership seems to be mushrooming. One can't but help wonder which bothers the high churches more; the burgeoning membership of the fundamentalist churches, or the affection these churches show for Israel.
One might raise one other question regarding the position of Presbyterians and likeminded churches as regards the middle east; namely, their lack of concern regarding what happened to the Christians in Iraq, how the Christians are treated in Pakistan, and what has now been happening to the Christians in Syria.
Yes Virginia, Anti-Semitism is still with us.
Yes, a vein of anti-Semitism once gushed through America's body politic. Consider, however, that America also had periods of anti-Irish sentiment, anti-Italian sentiment, and, of course, the infamous Jim Crow attitudes towards African-Americans.
But, today, what hostility we find between Jews and other groups is based mainly on socio-economic differences. In neighborhoods in Brooklyn where orthodox Jews live in close proximity to African-Americans you may find divisive attitudes. When one group is further down in terms of socio-economics than another, you may well find a certain hostility.
On the whole, however, we find there to be little anti-Semitism in America today. So what's the worry all about? It's about the concern we have for our brothers and sisters living in parts of the world far more hostile to Jews. I'm not talking about the Congo, or Zimbabwe. I'm talking about Europe, I'm talking about the Middle East, and I'm talking about places like South Africa. We tend not to worry much about anti-Semitism in Africa, because there aren't a great many Jews there. (South Africa is an exception. I would add that not only will you find Jews there, but that many of these Jews were in the forefront of the fight to end apartheid.)
Be that as it may, you find in South Africa, the preacher, Reverend Tutu, accusing Israel of practicing apartheid. This is especially shameful, because Tutu, more than anyone, should know what apartheid is. Let me explain: it was the discrimination of black South Africans within their own country. They were denied participation in the political life of their country by being relegated to areas within South Africa where they were denied educational opportunities and services provided to white South Africans. They were also denied the vote. That, most certainly, is not, nor has it ever been, a picture of Israel.
Let's face it, while Jews today are scattered around the world, most of us Jews are found in Israel and in the United States. Sure, the Europeans do have their Jewish populations, but, frankly, they're small in number. And, yet, we find Europeans beleaguering their Jews. They are now assaulting the Jewish religious ritual of Brit Milah (circumcision), a ritual practiced by Jews for thousands of years. Then too you have the assault on Shechita, the ritual slaughter of Kosher animals.
Israel has always played fair. It was never a place you'd confuse with South Africa. When the Arab armies attacked the Jews, most Arabs sought to get out of the way. In some places, such as Lod, which harbored Jordanian troops, and where the Arabs took up arms against the Jews, such Arabs were indeed forced to leave. (By some irony, the Jews who were forced to leave their homes in Egypt, Iraq and other Arab lands, equaled in number the Palestinian Arab refugees.
Today, Arabs who number roughly 20% of all Israelis enjoy the same rights as do Jews, Indeed, they have one special privilege; namely, they are not required to do national service in the military.
To refer to Israel as an apartheid state is nothing less than slander.
Today, attacking Jews head-on is not seen by anti-Semitic activists as being effective. Far better, they find, is to undermine specific Jewish targets including their precious Jewish state. To this end, they seek soft targets; namely, Israel's commerce with other nations, Israel's standing in international forums, its standing in the world of entertainment, and in academia and on campuses throughout the world. In short, anti-Semitism has moved from agitating among the lumpen proletariat (to use communist jargon) to agitating among the world's social elites.
Today's anti-Semitism is sleek and modern. It's far more sophisticated than in the good old days of inquisitions and church inspired pogroms. That all happened a long time ago when the Church could not forgive the Jews for not signing on to Christian theology. Jews then went on to disappoint Martin Luther. He figured that after what the Jews had suffered under the Roman Catholic Church, they'd be flocking to his Protestantism. When that didn't happen't, he gave them the back of his pastoral hand and joined the oversubscribed ranks of anti-Semites.
When discussing anti-Semitism, we find we must pause at the Holocaust. Here was anti-Semitism on steroids. It called for special chambers to be built. It called for a special poisonous gas. And, it didn't end there. Special ovens were needed to get rid of the mountains of corpses produced by the, oh, so efficient gasing. It's not that the anti-Semites had given up on plain, old bullets, or the use of CO produced by truck exhausts, or simply starving Jews to death. They did that too. But, the gas chambers represented a scientific advance in genocide on a scale that has yet to be matched.
So what were the Jews charged with back then? It was their lack of racial purity. The Germans seem to have forgotten that Jewish soldiers had fought valiantly, shoulder-to-shoulder in the first World War (WW I) with Christian Germans. The big lie hammered home time and again by the Nazis was that all the ills that had befallen Germany were the fault of the Jews. It was the Jews who had caused Germany to lose the war. It was Jews who had brought down on Germany the disastrous Versailles document that had set forth the conditions of German surrender after WW I. It was the Jews who were responsible for the Great Depression that had also fallen on Germany.
These new allegations seem to have overridden the older anti-Semitic allegations of Jews having killed Christ. (Note: Some Christians continue to make this allegation. No surprise there, when this falsehood can be ound on the pages of the Christian's New Testament?) At about this time, Czarist anti-Semites put forth the Protocol of the Elders of Zion which set forth the plans of the Jews for dominating the world. From Czarist Russia also came the noxious allegation that Jews killed Christian children for their blood needed to make matzos.
Some of these charges, crazy as they may be, have persisted to this day. Jews continue to be charged with controlling the media. They are still charged with controlling the world's banks. And, they are still charged with controlling America's politicians. But, now with the establishment of the State of Israel, anti-Semites have added new allegation to their long list of Jewish "crimes." The new charges center on their mistreatment of Palestinians. They allege that Israel has stolen the land of the Arabs and expelled Palestinians from their homes. Also, they find that Israel casually murders Palestinian men, women, and children. Add to that, that they are an apartheid nation.
Refuting these charges helps little. No amount of contrary evidence will ever convince an anti-Semite that Jews really don't control the banks, that they really don't control the world's politics, and that they really don't control the media. For those who may have forgotten, here is a quick listing of the facts:
1. Israel was granted statehood by the UN, just as the UN granted the Arabs their portion of Palestine.
The Arab nations refused to accept the UN's decision. The best trained army in the Middle East, thanks to the British, was the Jordanian army. They were joined by the Egyptian army, the Iraqi army, and the Syrian army in attacking what became the State of Israel.
2. At the root of the conflict was the role played by outsiders. Pan national Arab refusal to accept the fact of Israel's statehood let to a number of wars. They attacked in '48, they fought Israel again in the Six-Day War ('67), and they attacked Israel in the Yom Kippur War ('73). (Note: It was apparent from preparations made in Egypt, Jordan, and Syria that the Arab states were about to launch an attack on Israel in '67. Israel, realizing that the Jewish state might well be obliterated if the Arabs gained air superiority, preemptively destroyed the Egyptian air force as Egypt's planes sat on their landing strips. Rebuked by western nations for having struck preemptively, they did not do so in '73, even though military intelligence informed them of impending attacks by the Arab nations. Israel survived, but at a cost far greater than would have been the case if they had taken preemptive action.)
3. The PLO was not created until 1964. It was an organization conceived by Arab states in the course of the first Arab summit (the Arab League summit in Cairo in '64). The original PLO Charter stated, "Palestine with its boundaries that existed at the time of the British mandate is an integral regional unit" and sought to "prohibit . . . the existence and activity" of Zionism. It is interesting to note that the first leader of the newly created PLO was Yasser Arafat, an Egyptian. Based on the mountains of money Arafat secreted in Swiss banks for his family in the course of his reign, we can see that being a leader of the PLO has its rewards.
4. As to the apartheid charge: Human rights are respected in Israel for members of all religions including Muslims. It would be nice if we could say the same for Muslim countries. In Israel all people and that includes gays and people of color enjoy equal rights.
5. As to the expulsion of Arabs from Israel: For the most part and at the urging of the surrounding Arab nations, a great number of Arabs left Israel so as not to get killed in the cross fire. A small number of Arabs were indeed forced to leave Israel as a result of their taking arms against the Jews. However, some Arabs decided to stay put. Those Arabs now enjoy the same rights as all Israeli citizens. Most Arabs are Muslims, but a good number are Christians and Druze as well as members of other religions.
6. Displacement of Arabs: Determining ownership of land in pre-Israel Palestine required searching through land records kept in Turkey (a legacy of the Ottoman Empire.) Israelis have been scrupulous in settling only lands not owned by Arabs. (Note: Land in the West Bank was owned by either the state or by private parties. State owned land, which later reverted to Jordan, can be claimed by Israel as losses incurred by Jordan for waging war against Israel.)
7. What injustice, unquestionably done to Palestinian Arabs of the Muslim faith, has been done to them by their fellow Muslims. The Jews thrown out of their Jewish homes throughout Arab lands were resettled in Israel. Other peoples thrown from their homes throughout the span of history have always managed to get resettled. This goes for Greeks tossed out of Turkey, Turks tossed out of Greece, Germans tossed out of Czechoslovakia, and on and on. Only the Palestinians have been refused the opportunity to integrate into other lands. Citizenship was denied them by Lebanon, by Syria, by Iraq, by Egypt and so on. And, indeed, the UN has been complicit in allowing this unjust behavior to persist.
So much for the facts. Listing them will do little to end anti-Semitism. It's instructive however to look at the areas being targeted by anti-Semites.
Commerce
Caterpillar has been targeted by BDS (the group agitating for boycotting Israel, divesting from Israel and sanctioning Israel) for supplying earth moving equipment to Israel. TIAA-CREF, a major investor, did drop Caterpillar from its investment portfolio, but they did so because TIAA-CREF had found fault with Caterpillar's position regarding a union issue.
Veolia, a Paris based water and water waste systems/construction company and a transportation systems company removed itself from contention for work on the Jerusalem Light Rail project. lobbying against Veolia by BDS, as well as a human rights suit brought against the company in France, may have prompted Veolia to withdraw from a Sacramento, CA project. Note: Saudi Arabia had no problem providing Veolia with one of their lucrative project.
Olympia Food Coop in Washington State, in 2010, became the first American food chain to boycott Israeli goods. (It is important for all Jews to become aware of this situation and do a bit of research as to what happened here. Only then can one fully appreciate the invidious nature of BDS and the professionalism they bring in their attacks on Israeli interests.)
Max Brenner, a wholly owned subsidiary of Strauss Group, and a business developed by two Israelis has been under severe attack by BDS, especially in Australia.
SodaStream, boycotted by BDS experienced a fourth quarter, anti-SodaStream event at a Superbowl Sunday promotion in 2013. The efforts to injure SodaStream by BDS have happily been a failure judging by the continuing growth and profitability of this Israeli company. SodaStream has at least three plants, one of which is in Maale Adumim. The plants employ hundreds of Palestinians as well as Israelis. The employees word together and eat together in friendship. It has driven the BDS people crazy.
SEIU Local 721 is touted as an ally by the BDS people. And that may well be true. However, I was unable to find any connection or agreement on basic principals between this union representing government workers of Southern California and the BDS people. Note: BDS was rejected by AFL CIO President Richard Trumka.
These BDS efforts make clear that business connections favorable to Israel should anticipate BDS attacks. These attacks will very likely prove to be sophisticated and well funded. However, even Arab oil money only goes so far. And, its efforts have only garnered it only limited success.
Entertainers
Dustin Hoffman, Carlos Santana, Elvis Costello, Stevie Wonder, and Snoop Dogg are among those entertainers who, either have never visited Israel professionally, or who have demonstrated an overt hostility to Israel. Perhaps the greatest stars among the Israel bashers are Harry Belafonte, Alice Walker, and Emma Thompson.
So what gives? How did Israel become a villian in the minds of these celebrities? There are a number of possibilities. In the case of black performers, they appear to have conflated the history of African-Americans with that of the Palestinians. That the two narratives have almost nothing in common seems to make no difference to black anti-Semites. In the case of slavery, it was in large measure African Muslims who went into the depths of Africa to hunt down Africans to sell to slave ship captains. Enslaving blacks has a long history among Muslims of the Middle East. Roughly 8% of African slaves were shipped to America. (48% went to Brazil and roughly 44% were distributed among the nations of the Caribbean.) White men fought to keep America's slaves enslaved. But, white men also fought to end slavery. What then followed was Jim Crow.
But what does that dismal history have to do with the Israelis? Are the Ethiopians rescued by Israel from Islamic Ethiopia any less black than America's African-Americans?
Today we find Islamists using the Palestinians to continue their war on Israel. They phony up photos to show Israeli soldiers shooting Palestinian children. Never mind that these photos were clearly Photoshopped and show whatever serves the purposes of the Muslim leadership.
Go figure. Maybe Alice Walker took exception to Sammy Davis's conversion. Maybe she was ill-served by a Jewish lawyer or a Jewish agent. Who knows? Does it matter? The Nazis had Richard Wagner. Today's anti-Semites have Harry Belafonte. I believe that of the two, Wagner's music will have greater staying power.
Academia and college campuses
Endorsing Islamic chairs at universities throughout America has paid off big time for oil rich Islamic nations. How can Jewish youth argue with an anti-Semitic professor or an anti-Semitic thesis advisor? Less understandable is why grants from the U.S. Government are often found supporting Islamic propaganda.
So how to explain the anti-Israel sentiments of Stephen Hawking? But, then, how is one to explain the moral obtuseness of Heisenberg or the active anti-Semitism of Johannas Stark or Philipp Lenard, both supporters of Nazi mythology. Yet, both were Nobel class scientists.
Churches
Among Protestants, we find several puzzles. First, in the West Bank, we have the renown anti-Semite, Rev. Naim Ateek of the Sabeel Ecumenical Liberation Theology Center in Jerusalem, and author of the infamous book, Justice and Only Justice, A Palestinian Theology of Liberation, 1989. Yet the Christian population has been sharply declining in the Palestinian territories from 15% in 1950 to under 2% today. This due to Muslim persecution. I would guess that the price for this Christian Judas has been considerably greater than 13 pieces of gold.
Yet among Presbyterians, Episcopalians and other "high" Christian churches, the Rev. Ateek is a rock star. How does that figure? I've heard two theories. First, it's possible, I suppose, that these churches have actually swallowed the anti-Semitic Palestinian propaganda. More likely is the second hypothesis; namely, that because of falling membership, these churches are reaching out for something to reinvigorate their followers. When America fought for the equal rights of African-Americans, these churches did great work. They rolled up their sleeves and entered the fray. And, to their credit, they fought valiantly against the evil that was Jim Crow. These were also the days of protests against the war in Vietnam. This was a war that everyone hated and spurred the retirement of LBJ. Here again. the high Protestant churches could be found in the forefront of many of the demonstrations.
But, what crusade can they now fight to reinvigorate and revitalize their followers? Why, of course, the occupation and colonization of the Palestinians by Israel. The story line here is, of course, nonsense and could easily be refuted in open and honest debates. But, it seems to be the hope of these churches that fighting in behalf of the Palestinian cause will once again fill up their depleted pews. They may also believe that in following the Palestinian's noxious mirage they are demonstrating their superiority to the Evangelical upstarts whose membership seems to be mushrooming. One can't but help wonder which bothers the high churches more; the burgeoning membership of the fundamentalist churches, or the affection these churches show for Israel.
One might raise one other question regarding the position of Presbyterians and likeminded churches as regards the middle east; namely, their lack of concern regarding what happened to the Christians in Iraq, how the Christians are treated in Pakistan, and what has now been happening to the Christians in Syria.
Yes Virginia, Anti-Semitism is still with us.
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)