"Single Thought" and Victimhood

My last post was based on an article by Wafa Sultan.  She actually lived in the eye of the beast, the Syria of Haffez Assad and experienced what occurs when one refuses to submit.  She tells us what she was taught from the start.  To hate Jews!  So many Leftist activists simply refuse to accept or even acknowledge this reality, and in the process deny a victim whose rights were violated.  Yet they constantly tell me they are the ones that stand for human rights!

It would be nice if the role play might cease for a moment in the Arab-Israeli dialogue.  Perhaps then an answer would come to my question about what motivates a person like Sultan to come forth?  Is she just a Zionist tool or, according to Time Magazine, one whose power, talent or moral example is transforming our world?  In truth, I cannot understand the objection to the argument she offers, particularly from a human rights perspective as I understand it to be.  Indeed, I see her as a proponent of human dignity.

Which brings me to look at another woman, one not of the Middle East, but the Left.  Her name is Pilar Rahola, and she is a Spanish Catalan journalist, writer, and former Member of Parliament, and member of the far Left.

On December 16, 2009 she gave a talk she called, Jews with Six Arms, which raised another set of questions for those activists that call call themselves pro-Palestinian.  Or are they just anti-Israel?

Rahola laments the state of the environment when it comes the Arab-Israeli conflict:

The problem that those of us who do not demonize Israel have, is that there exists no debate on the conflict.

She says we throw slogans, not information, full of prejudices, propaganda and simplification. One cannot sway from universal idea of criticizing Israel without risk to become suspect and unfaithful to the cause.  Why?

To adherents of the anti-Israel Left, she asks:

Why, of all the conflicts in the world, only this one interests them?

Why is a tiny country which struggles to survive criminalized?

Why does manipulated information triumph so easily?

Why are all the people of Israel, reduced to a simple mass of murderous imperialists?

Why is there no Palestinian guilt?

Why is Arafat a hero and Sharon a monster?

Finally, why when Israel is the only country in the World which is threatened with extinction, it is also the only one that nobody considers a victim?

The question about Palestinian guilt is certainly apt considering the aftermath of the Gilat Shalit release in exchange for 1,027.  I commend this blog at CiF Watch for context: Shalit after Hamas captivity vs Palestinian terrorists after Israeli incarceration: A visual/moral contrast.

Rahola's last question is the most critical, however.  Why is Israel not entitled to the same victim status that would most assuredly be accorded if it was not Israel?

As it affects her questions, she understands and articulates effects of antisemitism.

Just as it is impossible to completely explain the historical evil of anti-Semitism, it is also not possible to totally explain the present-day imbecility of anti-Israelism. Both drink from the fountain of intolerance and lies. Also, if we accept that anti-Israelism is the new form of anti-Semitism, we conclude that circumstances may have changed, but the deepest myths, both of the Medieval Christian anti-Semitism and of the modern political anti-Semitism, are still intact. Those myths are part of the chronicle of Israel.

She also raises the matter of Islamic antisemitism that "contaminates more than 1,400 million people, who are educated, massively, in hatred towards the Jew."

The anti-Israel Left remains oblivious to the fundamentalist and supremacist (racist) totalitarian strain within present day Islam that impedes ethical development and violently attacks the forces of Islamic moderation and toleration.

[It] uses the name of God to perpetrate the most terrible horrors: lapidate women, enslave them, use youths as human bombs. [...] If Stalinism destroyed the left, and Nazism destroyed Europe, Islamic fundamentalism is destroying Islam.

Rather, it is too wrapped up in a narrative that seems too narrow and illusory.

That is why, when someone tries to go beyond the “single thought” of criticizing Israel, he becomes suspect and unfaithful, and is immediately segregated.

Rahola shows the nexus between totalitarian movements and Jew hatred, an Orwellian dichotomy that we ignore at our peril.

Nothing seems strange. Jewish culture represents, as no other does, the metaphor of a concept of civilization which suffers today attacks on all flanks. The Jews are the thermometer of the world’s health. Whenever the world has had totalitarian fever, they have suffered. In the Spanish Middle Ages, in Christian persecutions, in Russian pogroms, in European Fascism, in Islamic fundamentalism. Always, the first enemy of totalitarianism has been the Jew. And, in these times of energy dependency and social uncertainty, Israel embodies, in its own flesh, the eternal Jew.

So there you have it.  Israel is embodies the eternal Jew, who remains an object of hate to far too many, grounded in an ugly history of persecution in new clothes, so much so that the community of states and the anti-Israeli activists are incapable of recognizing victim status.

Why?

Canada signs Ottawa Protocol on Combating Anti-Semitism

Canada is seen by some as Israel's best friend.  It was the first country to withdraw from the anti-Semitic, UN sponsored Durban II and Durban III conferences.  It expressed serious concerns over the appointment of Richard Falk as the UN’s special rapporteur on the Palestinian territories after Falk compared Israel to Nazi Germany and authored an anti-Israeli article called "Slouching toward a Palestinian Holocaust."

Now, Canada has once again stepped forward.  It is the first country to sign the Ottawa Protocol on Combating Anti-Semitism. 

The Protocol, which was unanimously adopted in November 2010 at an international gathering hosted by Canada of the Inter-Parliamentary Coalition to Combat Antisemitism (ICCA) by some 140 parliamentarians from 50 countries, reaffirmed the London Declaration on Combating Antisemitism as a template for fighting against anti-Jewish prejudice.

According to ICCA Chair, Professor Irwin Cotler, a Liberal MP and former Minister of Justice and Attorney General of Canada: 

At a time when, as the Ottawa Protocol puts it, we are witnessing a global resurgence of antisemitism – the oldest, most enduring and toxic of hatreds – the Canadian initiative affirms the Ottawa Protocol’s Call for Action -  for governments to stand up and stand together in combating this paradigm of hatred.

The Protocol says: 

We remain alarmed by ongoing state-sanctioned genocidal antisemitism and related extremist ideologies. If antisemitism is the most enduring of hatreds, and genocide is the most horrific of crimes, then the convergence of the genocidal intent embodied in antisemitic ideology is the most toxic of combinations.

Agreeing to the Protocol is a commitment to institute tangible measures to combat antisemitism in all its forms, from classic anti-Jewish blood libels of medieval times to newer manifestations of this age-old hatred now masked in the language of anti-Zionism or anti-Jewish hatred disguised as criticism of Israel.  At the same time, it draws an important distinction:

Let it be clear: Criticism of Israel is not antisemitic, and saying so is wrong. But singling Israel out for selective condemnation and opprobrium – let alone denying its right to exist or seeking its destruction – is discriminatory and hateful, and not saying so is dishonest.

The protocol will help nations to measure and articulate their progress in combating anti-Semitism.  Among other things, members commit to:

Calling on our Governments to uphold international commitments on combating antisemitism – such as the OSCE Berlin Principles – and to engage with the United Nations for that purpose. In the words of former U.N. Secretary-General Kofi Annan, "It is […] rightly said that the United Nations emerged from the ashes of the Holocaust. And a Human Rights agenda that fails to address antisemitism denies its own history."

Calling on Parliaments and Governments to adopt the EUMC Working Definition of Antisemitism and anchor its enforcement in existing law. 

Encouraging the leaders of all religious faiths – represented also at this Conference – to use all means possible to combat antisemitism and all forms of hatred and discrimination. 

Calling on Governments and Parliamentarians to reaffirm and implement the Genocide Convention, recognising that where there is incitement to genocide, State parties have an obligation to act. 

Working with universities to encourage them to combat antisemitism with the same seriousness with which they confront other forms of hate. Specifically, universities should be invited to define antisemitism clearly, provide specific examples, and enforce conduct codes firmly, while ensuring compliance with freedom of speech and the principle of academic freedom.

It also seeks establishment of an international task force to identify and monitor hate on the Internet and the development of a comprehensive system to record all hate crimes, including anti-Semitic ones. 

Last November, Prime Minister Harper addressed the parliamentarians, and noted that when "Israel, the only country in the world whose very existence is under attack, is consistently singled out for condemnation, I believe we are morally obligated to take a stand."

Canadian support is not simply a reflection of a right-wing government. "The differences between the Liberals and Conservatives are vastly overstated," said David Bercuson, the director of the Centre for Military and Strategic Studies at the University of Calgary and author of Canada and the Birth of Israel.

Taking a pro-Israeli stance is not without cost, however.  Canada lost its 2010 bid to Portugal for a non-permanent seat on the UN Security Council. All 57 seats of the Organization of the Islamic Conference (now the Organization of Islamic Cooperation) opposed the Canadian nomination.  It was the first time since 1945 that Canada, a founding member of the UN, had not won a Security Council seat after having been elected in every previous decade.  Canada refused to water down its policy to curry the support of the UN’s despots and Muslim bloc to secure the seat.  As Harper told the parliamentarian gathering, "Canada will take that stand, whatever the cost." 

There are, after all, a lot more votes- a lot more- in being anti-Israel than in taking a stand. [...] The easiest thing to do is simply to just get along and go along with this anti-Israeli rhetoric, to pretend it is just about being even-handed, and to excuse oneself with the label of 'honest broker.'

Professor Cotler summarized the aspirations of those who pursue this issue: 

We trust that the Canadian initiative will inspire other governments to act – and parliamentarians to speak – in common cause. As Nobel peace laureate Prof. Elie Wiesel put it at the opening ceremony of the Conference, "Now is the time to mobilize a constituency of conscience on behalf of all humanity."

For as history has taught us only too well, while it may begin with Jews, it doesn’t end with Jews.

The Palestinian Cause and Antisemitism

The issue arises whether antisemitism has infiltrated into pro-Palestinian politics.  The argument now heard is that to fight antisemitism is “anti-Palestinian.”  Little has been done to challenge the argument.  As a result, an impression grows that pro-Palestinian activism promotes antisemitism.

Of course, criticism of Israel and its policies does not constitute antisemitism.  It must also be acknowledged that some Western anti-Zionists genuinely speak out at the defamation of Jews.  Some understand that support for the Palestinian cause will surely diminish if it becomes identified with genocidal racism.  Historically, explicit and undisguised antisemitism was generally opposed in their circles, but there are increasing examples of change.  This is especially the situation in Europe, and increasingly in the USA among the Western anti-Zionist elites, for lack of a better term.  (Suggestions welcome!)

One clear indicator of tolerance of antisemitism within pro-Palestinian politics regards Hamas, whose founding Covenant spews Jew hatred and whose officials repeatedly make genocidal threats.  To support Hamas’s political agenda against Israel, pro-Palestinian activists deny antisemitism, do not openly and vociferously call for Hamas to change, and even paint Hamas’s critics as racists and “Islamophobes.”  In my own experience, it matters little about the substance offered to illustrate behavior, of which I believe many are truly ignorant, but more to do with the ideology and "solidarity." 

The most cynical pro-Palestinian activists are not afraid to associate their cause with antisemitism.  Rather than harm the cause, they believe tapping into age-old notions of scheming, controlling, corrupting Jews helps to attract passionate supporters.  Objecting to antisemitism is presented as a Jewish trick and part of a conspiracy against Palestinians.  Look at virtually any comment thread at Mondoweiss or Comment is Free.

In any case, antisemitism dressed as a “pro-Palestinian” politics is growing and effectively unchallenged.  It has become mainstream.  To quote Atzmon: “The Tide Has Changed.“  Atzmon is supported by Mearsheimer and Falk, and there are so many other instances.

Over at CiF Watch, a post today reveals some of these "tide changers" who apparently signed a letter publicized by the Guardian.  Signed by dozens of anti-Israel activists, it argues that the EU not allow Israel to host an under-21 European soccer tournament and, more broadly, should exclude the Jewish state from the community of nations.

The letter is signed, among others, by:

Ken Loach, a film maker who’s accused Israel of adopting a policy of Nazi-like ”racial purity”,

Miriam Margolyes: A UK actress who has argued that Israel’s behavior causes antisemitism and makes her ashamed to be a Jew.

Nurit Peled: An Israeli academic who is opposed to Israel’s existence as a Jewish state, characterizes Zionism as inherently racist, and has justified suicide bombing as “the direct consequence of the oppression, slavery, humiliation and state of siege imposed on the Palestinians.”

John Pilger: An Australian journalist who routinely compares Israel to Nazi Germany, and even once even participated in a cross-border terrorist raid by members of the Palestinian Front for the Liberation of Palestine.

Jean Ziegler: Vice-president, advisory committee of the UN human rights council, who has promoted the work of Holocaust Denier Roger Garaudy, has referred to Israel’s leaders as “state terrorists”, and has depicted Israel in Nazi terms.

Apparently, these "moral voices" have declared Israel has no right to be treated as a member of the community of nations and should be completely isolated by the international community.  Wonder if the same can be said for some of the world’s worst human rights abusers, including China, Cuba, Saudi Arabia, Syria, Burma, and North Korea?

Back to the main point.  When advocates routinely conflate opposition to antisemitism with hatred of Palestinians, and neglect promotion of antisemitism and anti-Semites within their midst, then the connection between pro-Palestinian activism and antisemitism is reinforced and the question raised is the Palestinian cause now essentially antisemitic?

Between the Desert and the Sea

Saw the video below at Elder of Ziyon (EoZ), one of the best sites out there.

Besides being laughable, this perfectly illustrates elitist leftists with nothing better to do than show how clueless they are to the issues, safe and far from the front lines.  These particular folks may be from Australia, but are no less representative of many across Europe and the USA.

As I and others have have said, there are finite resources available to help the suffering, and this is what these people choose not only as an issue, but an obsession.



Also courtesy of EoZ and his friends at Google Translate, we learn that, according to a Palestine Times story, Hamas has committed:

• 4303 terror attacks
• 61 suicide attacks
• 24 attempts to capture Israelis
• 423 bombings
• 90 sniper attacks
• 146 ambushes

Not to mention the rockets!

I suspect our friends above cannot conceptualize in their minds, let alone their songs.