A great example of why it is so difficult for Israeli supporters to tease out the anti-Semitism from the anti-Israeli crap. Jews have been very restrained for the most part in being circumspect about the use of “anti-Semitism.” But it is getting harder and harder to distinguish between the two with the ramping up of all these benighted boycott movements.
If Israel is legitimate and commendable, so is (was) colonialism.
Sure, colonialism would have been a great thing if Europeans had colonized (in 1860) a virtually depopulated province of a large empire, one in which they had never entirely left, were welcomed in (at least initially) by the rulers of that empire, were fleeing genocide, bought most of the land they used legitimately (at least until the war of 1948) from the previous land-owners of that province and improved the local economy so much that hundreds of thousands of natives from surrounding provinces moved back into the province from 1870 to 1920 to take advantage of the newly created jobs.
Well stated. And of course, even if we accept Philo’s description of the founding of Israel as “colonialist,” then I await with baited breath his list of all the nations on this planet that are not the result of colonization.
what was the arab conquest of Palestine – the summer of love?
Jews lived in Gaza for thousands of years before the first Arab to arrive there ever colonized it.
So what nation is Israel a colony of, and what nation sent Zionists to colonize it?
Or are we merely redefining colonialism the same way we did apartheid, so that we can use it as a stick to beat Israel with?
“the Jews” are a group of people with very different opinions and
desires, that they do not act in concert, and that individual Yale
students, for example, of Jewish descent who are American citizens have
zero responsibility for any policies of the government of Israel.”
This is all true …. but … and I say this as a Jew and an ardent Zionist, there is a kernel of truth in the claim that Jews have an obligation to speak out against atrocities committed in their names. This is because Zionism — unlike any other national movement — is internationally motivated. Its principle goal is to create a worldwide safety net for Jews everywhere, in case there is another Holocaust. If Israel were in fact behaving in a heinous manner, then it would indeed be the obligation of Jews worldwide to speak out. (Ironically, this reminds me of the complaint conservatives level against moderate Muslims — that they never speak out against Islamist atrocities carried out in their names. It’s an interesting question, really: what obligation do Muslims living in the West have to speak out against the barbaraism of IS, Al Qaeda, etc.?) One big difference, of course, is that the IDF commits no barbarisms. It consistently acts properly, indeed irreproachably, in its handling of the never-ending belligerance directed at Israel by its Arab neighbors. The state treats its Arab citizens as equals when a less high-minded polity might regard them as a fifth column.) How Israel treats genocidal foreign invaders who cynically shoot from behind unsheltered women and children is something entirely separate. The entire world should publically shame Hamas for such cowardice. (BTW, shame is something Islamists can’t tolerate. It really should be tried. But that’s a different discussion.)
This Yale chaplain absurdly implies that resolution of the longstanding problem of Palestinian statelessness — i.e. Israeli disengagement from WB and lifting of blockaage in Gaza — would somehow appease the Islamists. His is deadly wrong in this Pollyannaish thinking. If Israel did what Rev. Shipman wants it to do, we know what would follow: the PA would fall to Hamas, as it did in Gaza, and soon there would be missile and mortar attacks on Israel from Ramallah, Hebron, Bethlehem, etc. The IDF would retaliate with deadly force, resulitng in more heart-wrenching scenes of maimed Arab women and children. Talk about a never-ending cycle of violence!
You make excellent points.
I see no hope for peace in this generation. It will take a unforeseen change in circumstances to make a two-state solution possible. Until then Israel must hang on and do the best she can in an impossible situation.. I feel sorry for her being stuck in that corner of the world.
I wonder if any of this really fits in a “Chaplain’s” job description.
Shipman is a vile Jew hater.
I quite agree with this ‘chaplain.”
The greatest Jewish contributor to anti-Semitism was Jesus, a born Jew, in whose name all churches set out to defame, besmirch, harry, murder, rape and pillage all subsequent generations of Jews. All because the Jews killed a god, LOL. How can one kill a god? Instead of blessing the Jews, who bore this god, who were allegedly responsible for his death, without which there would be no salvation, as he supposedly died for others sins, they castigate the Jews.
“The greatest Jewish contributor to anti-Semitism was Jesus, a born Jew, in whose name all churches set out to defame, besmirch, harry, murder, rape and pillage all subsequent generations of Jews.”
What a libel. The Jews were a protected and privileged religious minority — the only one, I might add — throughout Catholic and Protestant Europe, which is why they survived (unlike a lot of other religious dissenters who were simply wiped out).
Nothing is more damaging to Jewish-Gentile relations here in the US than the historical truths we think we know which just aren’t so. It explains a lot of the so-called war on whites by Jewish journalists and opinion makers.
War on whites by Jewish journalists? Where do you find this stuff, Stormfront?
The Jews were a protected and privileged minority? By whom, may I ask?
By the leaders who corralled and locked them into ghettos? By the palatine princelings who decided how many Jews were allowed to marry each year and how much it would cost them? By the church, who every Good Friday preached against Jews and led pogroms that killed thousands yearly? By the Kings of Europe who used Jewish money to build their armies and then refused to pay back monies owed. By the Kings of England who force the Jews to pay for the building of Westminster Abbey. By the crusaders who killed in excess of 30,000 Jews in the Rhineland? By the Spanish Inquisition? By those that blamed the Jews for the Black Death claiming they poisoned wells. Or was it the Church that claimed Jews killed Christian children to use their blood to bake matzos for Passover? By the English kings who forbade their people to plunder the Jews as their wealth was royal property and only a king’s right to steal? Or was it the mass burning of 10,00 Jews in Geneva on St. Valentines Day in 1367?
Or the destruction of Spanish Jews in Lisbon in 1497?
Kindly elucidate on these protections and privileges.
Someone ought to create a reality show called “Ivy League Chaplains” or maybe a better name for the reality show would be “When Good Chaplains Go Bad.”
If the offensive remarks of the Yale Episcopal Chaplain were all there was, we could just chalk the whole thing up to the fact that Reverend Shipman is a politically correct dimwit. Unfortunately it seems that chaplains of the Ivy League insert their feet into their preternaturally large mouths with alarming regularity.
In 2009, the Muslim Chaplain of Harvard, Taha Abdul-Basser, responded to a student inquiry about the ubiquity of capital punishment for apostasy in Islamic nations by offering tacit support for the practice. After a lengthy discussion of the positions of various Muslim authorities, the Imam emailed the student that “there is great wisdom (hikma) associated with the established and preserved position (capital punishment), and so, even if it makes some uncomfortable in the face of the hegemonic modern human rights discourse, one should not dismiss it out of hand.” If the Harvard faculty had any problems with Chaplain Abdul-Basser’s contempt for “hegemonic modern human rights discourse” you wouldn’t know it; Harvard’s famously loud-mouthed faculty didn’t make a peep.
Of course when Hindus were the perpetrators of what they viewed as politically incorrect commentary instead of Muslims, the Harvard faculty found its voice. In 2011, the Harvard faculty terminated the teaching responsibilities of Economics Professor Subramanian Swami after the Hindu nationalist professor made comments that a small number of nitwits thought were critical of Muslims in the aftermath of the Mumbai massacres. What does any of this have to do with chaplains? The ringleader of the anti-Subramanian faction on the Harvard faculty who advocated his dismissal was Professor of Comparative Religion, Diane Eck. Professor Eck is married to Episcopal Minister, Dorothy Austin who was, for a time, the Episcopal Chaplain at Harvard.
Not to be left out is Brown University which experienced its own chaplain controversy in 2006. In November of that year, Brown’s Hillel organization invited Nonnie Darwash to give a talk on campus. Darwish, an Arab who had become pro-Israel was the author of “Now They Call Me Infidel: Why I Renounced Jihad for America, Israel, and the War on Terror.”
Born in Cairo and raised in Gaza, Darwish is the daughter of an Egyptian intelligence officer killed by Israeli soldiers. In her book, she says she was indoctrinated from childhood to hate Israel but changed her views after befriending Jews who yearned for peace and after her brother’s life was saved by Jewish doctors at Jerusalem’s Hadassah Hospital. Subsequently Darwash rejected Islam in favor of an evangelical church.
The invitation to Darwish to speak at Brown was rescinded after Brown’s Muslim Chaplain, Rumee Ahmed, vociferously objected to the invitation and criticized the Brown “Women’s Center” which had planned to co-sponsor the event. Chaplain Ahmed said Darwish’s views were offensive to Muslims, who Ahmed claimed lived in fear for their safety at Brown University.
And then there’s the 2013 controversy at Dartmouth that didn’t exactly involve a chaplain but its close. In that year, Dartmouth appointed Bishop James Tengatenga of the Anglican Diocese of Southern Malawi as the Dean of a Campus Institution that focuses on furthering moral and spiritual work. Tengatenga, who had served as chairman of what is effectively the board of directors of the 85 million member worldwide Anglican Communion, had already resigned his diocesan post and expressed public support for gay marriage after receiving the Dartmouth post. But apparently that wasn’t enough for Dartmouth to actually install the Bishop in the position that Dartmouth had offered him. You see, shortly before taking up his new position, it came to light that in 2011, Bishop Tengatenga had criticized the election of Bishop Gene Robinson of New Hampshire, the first openly gay bishop in the Anglican Communion, and that he had asserted ithat the Anglican dioceses in Malawi remained totally against homosexuality. Despite Tengtenga’s pleas that his position on homosexuality had evolved, Dartmouth concluded that the Bishop was unfit to advise Dartmouth students on spiritual issues.
I could go on and on. Of course, maybe the problem isn’t with Ivy League Chaplains; many there’s simply something rotten in the Ivy League itself.
Reading feed brings to mind that if anyone (not just Yale chaplain or Ivy League chaplains per se) wants to find Anti-Semitism, Anti-Catholicism, Anti-Islamism, Anti-Protestantism, Anti-Foreignism, etc. one need go no farther than these same groups; where we may find Jew against Jew, Catholic against Catholic, Protestant against Protestant, Muslim against Muslim, etc. and “all” against each other – and…against the whole.
That letter is tame. Here is what I wrote and I copied all staff at that Episcopal chapel and the Press/Media at Yale and the Presidents office who replied. I made sure that cretin Shipman saw that I mailed all those people.
our highest values.
Subject: Bruce Shipman at Yale
How can it be that someone like Bruce who in the Letters to the Editor pages of the New York Times states that we Jews are responsible for anti-Semitism against us due to the conflict in the Middle East is involved with Yale in any capacity, never mind one who is supposed to impart faith, tolerance and respect.
Can you imagine a Christian whose co-religionists have butchered us for centuries now having the gall to tell us that actually, we are the ones who bring this on ourselves? So, synagogues being attacked in France, Jews attacked all over Europe and now even in the USA, it’s our fault?
In fact, the safest place for Christians and other minorities in the Middle East these days is Israel.
Disgusting and a blot on Yale University for having this person associated with you,
“a Christian whose co-religionists have butchered us for centuries”
A gross exaggeration unless you count the Nazis as Christians. This particular myth — that Jews were persecuted by Christians for religious reasons on a regular basis — does much to harm Jewish-Gentile relations right here in the United States, in my opinion.
Oh, my bad it was the Amish who butchered us. The rest we just made up. You and Jon Robbins must be in the same club
What goes around comes around. Revenge of the Canaanites.
Don’t forget the Quakers.
And the Bahai.
Yes, you are the ones who have brought this on yourselves. Judaism and modern Zionism are vicious, racist ideologies that promote the exploitation of non-Jews–a “chosen people” to whom all things, vis-a-vis non-Jews–are in effect permitted. The Jewish bible with its proto-fascist genocidal impulses and other Jewish writings over the centuries make this quite clear.
The only thing that has limited the scope of Jewish viciousness is the small size of historical Jewry. But when given the opportunity–as in Egypt, Cyrenaica and Cyprus in the 1st century AD or in Jerusalem in 610, Jews have shown themselves quite capable of slaughtering Christians (and anyone else who gets in the way of their self-aggrandizing delusions.) The oppression of the early Christian church in Jerusalem was a portent of things to come. But, given the psychopathic ideology at the hearty of Judaism, this should be no surprise.
Jewish exploitation of the immiserated European peasantry in collusion with military aristocratic and royal regimes spawned a quite understandable hatred of Jews that became deeply embedded in European culture. Jews have sooner or later alienated all peoples on whom they have foisted themselves whether pagan, Christian or Muslim. The state of Israel has played a major role in alienating the Muslims who sadly now see the Christians among them–who have lived on generally good terms for centuries–as agents of the Zionist West. The comment above is typically repulsive Jewish thinking: Jews create a problem by playing a central role in turning Muslims against Christians and then gleefully claim that they are protectors of Christians. What nonsense!
Good to see that Christian clergymen are starting to come out of hiding and speak out against the depravity of Jewish ideology and practice. Long overdue!
You are another shining example of Christian anti-Semitism and a clear example of what I referred to in my letter.
Your response has no substance whatsoever. The real question, though, and the one that needs addressing, is whether “anti-semitism” is in fact an appropriate response to the fascist inclinations at the heart of Judaism and of organized Jewry.
The issue is indeed Jewish ideology and Jewish practice whether in Israel or elsewhere. You are simply enraged to be called for it.
“Jewish exploitation of the immiserated European peasantry in collusion with military aristocratic and royal regimes spawned a quite understandable hatred of Jews that became deeply embedded in European culture.”
Because, as we all know, there were absolutely no laws whatsoever shoving Jews out of most every other profession besides the financial ones…oh, wait, there were? At that juncture, you might as well say that Appalachian hatred of black slaves was justified, as said slaves were the basis of the wealth of the planters who tried to keep them poor.
The Jews had already alienated the Greeks of the pre-Christian Eastern Mediterranean when they went looking for greener pastures in the Latin/Christianizing West. The Jews wanted to live among the Greeks but be permitted to reserve their loyalty for one another, and the Greeks responded to Jewish in-group preference as everybody since has done: with a deepening animosity for Jewish belief and practice. This is the unremitting pattern: Alienate one host nation and then flee to another host and begin to alienate him.
The Jews should be thankful for the influence of Saint Augustine. Otherwise, the European masses might have been allowed to take a more Israelite approach to the problem of “Canaanites” and other disagreeable foreigners.
Because, as we all know, the Greeks totally had a leg to stand on that regard. In-group preference was all over the place in the ancient world, the Jews just had the addition of monotheism.
In group preference does exist everywhere and at all times. No one, however, has elaborated it ideologically like the Jews, taken the basic tribal instinct, that is, and enshrined it in a monotheistic God who demands genocide in order to promote the welfare of “His people.”
Greek culture, whatever its other faults, and its imperial upsurge in the 4th-1st centuries BC, was inclusive and widely attractive. Why else did Jews migrate in large numbers into culturally Greek lands–Ionia, Syria, Egypt?
As Greeks or others such as the Hellenized Egyptian Manetho read the translated Jewish bible, they were repelled. Imagine yourself as an Egyptian reading the offensive tall tales of the Book of Genesis wherein the Egypt–in practice a traditional haven for Jews–is made the bad guy and this while Jewish immigrants to Egypt demanded special privileges from Greek authorities which most Egyptians did not enjoy. Anti-Jewish sentiment rose rapidly and continued as a feature of Hellenistic Egypt until the Jews were expelled in the early 2nd century AD. In the Jewish mind, of course, this is all unaccountable “anti-semitism.” This kind of mindset is truly pathological.
The proof is in the pudding: It’s the Jews who inspire systemic antipathy even in the present day, not the Greeks.
the elephant in the living room just stepped on your pudding: the antipathy is from christianity and islam being Judaism’s (in the words of gore vidal) dreary step-children.
I am not aware of any antipathy from Bhuddist or Hindu countries.
As I said in other comments, serial Jewish alienation of non-Jews predates Christianity, so your point is totally invalid.
I am not aware of any antipathy from Bhuddist or Hindu countries.
This is the unremitting pattern: Alienate one host nation and then flee to another host and begin to alienate him.
I guess you are happy now that the dasterdly jews have now broken that pattern – they arent hosted anymore!
Do you think so? Well, we’ll see.
cue – scary music
So what if Jews were insular back in ancient Greece. Are you honestly implying that is a good reason to hate and fear a particular group. Asian immigrants are insular here in the US. Whites in the south were extremely insular during Jim crow, keeping black out of all kinds of jobs. Should we hate them and blame those whites if someone burns their church down? When Mexican, Chinese or real Italian restaurant doesn’t hire family and friends? What group doesn’t turn insular if they are a minority group trying to obtain economic prosperity in a foreign land. Give me a freaken break, I could go on and on about insular groups, so why single out the Jews especially (is it because they
are winners)? Furthermore, if Jews should have never left Israel, I guess your ancestor’s and mine should have never left Europe and killed all those Indians and taken their lands. At least the Jews didn’t do that, even if, as you imply, they wanted to. Does that mean we should hate ourselves? No, of course it doesn’t. Hating and blaming Jews for the relatively mild abuses they have committed historically is, for
most people, the height of hypocrisy considering what most of our own ancestors
have done. By the way, I’m Anglo Saxon and Danish. My ancestors murdered and
pillaged their way throughout Europe and especially England for centuries, and
committed deliberate genocide of the Romanized Britians when they arrived in
England, so I’m going to cut the Jews some slack for charging high interest
rates in the late middle ages and being a little insular. Now I could get real mean here, but I’m not.
By the way, if you do happen to be Christian, what have you
done to recover the Jews? Do you love all people as Jesus commanded? What do
you think is the greater sin, hating people, or having an insular culture in a
Your points about Anglo-Saxons et al looting, murdering, conquering, etc are perfectly valid. However, European imperial depredations, Greek misogyny, Roman brutality, Muslim aggressions, etc, etc have been combed through with thoroughness in academia and before the general or at least the literate public.
Only one group escapes this kind of scrutiny and criticism: Jews. It’s time that that omission was rectified. The ongoing project of Judeo-fascism in its gradual conquest of Palestine takes place with the support of obsequious milquetoasts like you. I’m not interested in your ethnic background–that’s your business.
As I said below, the only reason that a murderous, genocidal ideology like Judaism has not claimed many more lives than it has is that, thankfully, the scope of this cult has been restricted by its size. Still, given its limitations, it has managed to exercise a baleful influence where ever it has wandered.
The genocide of the Canaanites and others (which unlike the supposed sojourn in Egypt and so much else in the Tanakh, is actually highly plausible), the forcible conversion of the Idumeans and Galileans, the pogroms against non-Jews in Egypt, Cyrenaica, and Cyprus: Whenever Jews have wielded political sovereignty–i.e., before c. 100 AD and since the 20th century, they have been relentlessly harsh taskmasters and genocidaires.
If you want to cut the Jews slack, that’s your business. That medieval peasants were not as generous with their meager lives as you are can hardly be held against them. That goes for the Palestinians whose land has been stolen from them by Eastern European Jews over the last 100+ years. Jewish ideology is what it is: Chosenist, fundamentally fascist, and always ready to exploit.
Shipman wouldn’t agree with any of this, but that is not the point. He has rendered the mildest criticism possible of the ongoing atrocities in Gaza–and really only to forestall an “antisemitism” he is almost as terrified of as you are. No doubt this crushing of the inhabitants of Gaza meets with your approval, as you breathlessly await the rebuilding of the Temple and the establishment of Eretz Israel as the imagined prerequisite of Christ’s return. What a sad and repulsive creature you are!
Jews may have been pretty strict pre-AD 100. However, during that time period, you have to judge them by the standards of the time. Like I already mentioned, the Anglo-Saxons did the same thing in the 6th century. Furthermore, judging
any people (Anglo-Saxons included) by something that happened 100’s of years ago is pretty ridiculous since most cultures and cultural institutions change radically over time, and that can be said with great emphasis over the last 100 years. 200 years ago, there wasn’t a nation on the earth that batted an
eye when it came to imperial conquest and exploitation of local populations
(ostentatiously for their own good!). I’m sure Jews, if they had a nation of their
own, would have, like anybody else, tried to carve out an empire. However, what matters is now, not what happened 2000 or even 200 years ago and Jews, in the nations that they have populated, at least in the last 50 years have contributed enormously to the scientific progress of every nation of which they have been a significant minority. A very short list of these
contributions (just to make a point) is: The theory of relatively, the first polio vaccine, color photography, the origin and spread of infection diseases, the chemical structure of antibodies, identifying the first cancer virus, the structure of atomic nuclei, and 19% of total nobel prizes every received.
There is probably no single group, that, for their size, has contributed
more to scientific discovery than the Jews. Furthermore, Israel itself probably produces more patents per capita (especially in medical technology) than any country in the world.
With regard to Palestine (and I’ve read the history extensively), pre-WWII, the vast majority of land the Jews settled on was bought either from rich Arab land owners or from the Turkish government . Rich Jews in Europe and US
contributed vast sums of money for mostly Russian Jews (who were fleeing
pogroms) to settle in Palestine. Between 1919 and 1940, Europeans gave Arabs 2 chances to run the government in Palestine, the only condition being that, even though they would have a majority vote, they would have to share some power with the Jewish residents. In these agreements, the Jews would have received about 20% of the land. While the Arab street was okay with this, the Arab leaders flat-out refused both times, referring to the Jews as dogs and vowing that they would never share power in their land with Jews (never mind that the majority of Palestinians who currently live in Palestine moved their after 1870, many to work the enormously successful farms that the Jews established post 1870). By 1948, extremist elements both among the extreme Zionists and the Arabs had been committing atrocities for 20 years and were both spoiling for a fight, though Palestinians technically started the war when Palestinian militias opened fire (en masse) on the Jewish quarter in Jerusalem.
The original atrocities basically started when extreme Zionists told
Jews in Palestine to clear non-Jew tenant farmers off Jewish owned land (though tensions were already building before that), to make room for more Jewish immigrants. Many Jews simply refused, but many complied which led to angry Arab farmers, now out of work, attacking Jewish settlements. The incidents started off relatively mild, but, in an all too familiar process of reciprocal escalation, led to the War of 1948 in which the Jews crushed the Palestinians and all their Arab allays in an embarrassing (and characteristic) display of inept Palestinian leadership and unpreparedness.
Personally, I don’t strongly support either side in Palestine.
My review of the history leads me to the conclusion that they are both
at fault, they both have legitimate grievances. However, I certainly don’t blame Jews abroad in other countries for what goes on in Israel, especially since many Jews abroad don’t even agree with how Israel handles things. Furthermore, (and this is the main point for me) I consider Jewish culture to one which fosters
winners. There will always be people who look at successful outsiders and despise them for their success. I prefer to learn from their cultural
institutions and incorporate what works into my own. The bottom line is that winners don’t feel threatened by other winners. That being said, I don’t think you are a loser (you seem very intelligent). However, being less successful in our current society does seem to characterize many of the other folks who I have met who despise Jews.
Don’t forget. The Book of Mormon accepts the proposition that that American Indians are actually the ancient Israelites.
A much better article on this subject from Mondoweiss:
Right, using an anti-Semitic website for justifying anti-Semitism doesn’t really cut it.
If you think the article is wrong, then say so and say why. What REALLY doesn’t cut it is to imagine that you can dismiss an argument or a website merely by spewing, “Anti-Semitism!” Aren’t you at all embarrassed to resort to that sort of dishonesty?
Well John, the idea that IDF is engaged in serious war crimes is ridiculous, in fact they have one of the best records in that reguard.
As is the self-refuting claim that Israel practices apartheid.
It’s pretty clear from his other posts here that he hates Jews and Judaism to a degree that makes Mondoweiss look tame — which he probably considers it to be.
was nothing anti-Semitic in telling the truth about a reason for growing
anti-Semitism, and that reason is the growing racism, bigotry, hatred and
genocide practiced by Jews. In this country alone, you have to be appalled at
the number of high profile instances of racism involving Jews as the
wrong-doers. Whether it be Donald Sterling (a Jew), or Bruce Levenson (a Jew),
or Gene Simmons (a Jew and of KISS fame) and Mark Cuban (a Jew), you have a rash
of Jews involved in racist comments or actions (e.g., the housing
discrimination practices of Sterling that resulted in the court assessed
penalties of literally millions of dollars he’s had to pay for his racial
hatred and the harm he visited upon peoples of color) against people who are
already historically oppressed.
can that be from people who themselves have been immorally and systematically
stereotyped virtually everyplace their diaspora has taken them? These are not
isolated incidents, but part of a larger pattern of racism and bigotry that has
been practiced by Jews. And not just here of course, but in Israel. It’s not
just the continuing effort by Israeli Jews to steal more land from the
Palestinians, it’s the original mid-twentieth century invasion and theft of
land in Palestine after a 2000 year absence that is revisited when you’re
caused to examine the entire historic relationship between the Palestinians and
Jews. And the genocide the Israeli Jews practice or their indifference to genocide
and racial hatred becomes even clearer when one recalls that the Jews of Israel
supported genocide and racial hatred practiced by apartheid South Africa when
the Afrikaner illegally and cruelly kept Mandela and tens of thousands of other
innocents imprisoned for decades for simply fighting against severe oppression
and genocide there. Israel opened and maintained diplomatic and trade relations
with apartheid South Africa although it knew the consequences of South Africa’s
official policies for every black and brown person born or otherwise living
there. The genocide and indifference to the rights of a brown skinned people
such as the Palestinian people becomes more prominent then in the context of
this plain pattern, and so does the corresponding and reciprocating
indifference for legitimate Jewish concerns such as anti-Semitism, albeit of an
obviously different origin and basis than traditional anti-Semitism animated by
historically false stereotypes.
that blacks will become more indifferent and uncaring of Jewish existential and
bigotry concerns if Jews continue to exhibit hostile and discriminatory words
and actions against blacks. It’s just a natural reaction after awhile — how
long can you hate me before I start to hate you or become indifferent to your
needs or the hate directed at you. Jews rightfully stress that we must not
forget the lessons of history lest the horrors of history repeat themselves.
Somewhat selfishly they have stridently pushed virtually only the Holocaust as
a history lesson to be prominently taught and remembered as sacred history in
America despite the fact that that sad and horrific episode of history took
place entirely on foreign soil and involved foreign actors and therefore has
nothing to do with American history. This occurs at the same time that the far
longer history of slavery and genocide here in America has been largely ignored
and otherwise downplayed by white America with Jews certainly not pushing for a
much more prominent, fuller, and truthful telling and remembrance of those
stories that continue to adversely affect the interests of the two main groups
affected by that genocide — African Americans and Native Americans. The
problem then is a perception that all that matters to Jews are Jews, and that
there exists at minimum an indifference if not downright disrespect for the
legitimate needs and rights of others in the context of racism and bigotry.
Couple that truth with the words and deeds of Sterling, Levenson, Cuban and
other bigoted Jews as well as the Palestinian issue and what Israel did with
apartheid South Africa, and you have a basis for great distrust and antipathy
by blacks and others relative to Jews and the need for all of us to work
together to solve the perfidy of racial and ethnic hatred.
bigger problem is indeed the reaction of those who are directly affected by
Jewish racism, bigotry or indifference. What do they do; what will be their
response, or even that of people of good will who sympathize with their plight?
If dislike of Jews because of their attitudes and policies that are just as
hateful and harmful as anti-Semitism is the result, is that anti-Semitism too?
Or is it a consequence of what Jews themselves have done and are doing? You
can’t ask me not to forget those very important lessons of history, to stand
with you against what surely will repeat itself again as the pogroms of Eastern
Europe that preceded the holocaust were nothing less than a repetition of
anti-Semitic behavior that was before that carried on continuously for hundreds
of years, when you seem to have forgotten those lessons yourselves, at least
when it comes to black and brown or other historically mistreated people.
I want Jews to wake up and practice what they preach. I don’t
want another holocaust or episodes of anti-Semitism to occur and see my
neighbors participating in support of it not because of a traditional false
belief that Jews are inherently evil and act humanely solely in relation to
their own causes or when they’re in distress, but because of discriminatory and
disparaging words and practices Jews make and do, an unneeded and entirely
undesirable reaction to mistreatment of my neighbors. I don’t want to be caused
to become indifferent to anti-Semitism with my previously unshakable belief for
what is right and my compassion and empathy for Jewish suffering to dissipate
because of a realization that the people I care about don’t care about me. That
would be a horrible end for me, and even a worst end for a people who are
increasingly forgetting that they need me and everyone else as much if not more
than we need them. Yep, they would do well to heed the truth as expressed in
the words of this Anglican prelate, and note the historical folly of killing
the messenger just to suppress the truth.
You forgot deicide. And international drug dealing and pornography, organ theft and murdering non-Jews to use their blood as a baking ingredient. But apart from those, you did manage to hit most of the major themes. Congratulations, and don’t forget to pick up your torch and pitchfork on your way out.
I don’t know sarcastic ahad, you seem to be a moronic imbecile. I don’t have to address the b.s. that you poorly articulate. However, if you were interested in serious dialogue, you’d address the facts, and only the facts and what reasonable conclusions can be drawn from them. I don’t know anything about international drug dealing, pornography, or anything of that sort. Apparently, you do. I do though know about what I stated such as the Israelis having been in business and comfy cozy with the Nazis of South Africa to the detriment of their victims, the same analogous relationship as with any nation that voluntarily had diplomatic and trade relations with Nazi Germany (e.g., Romania, Ukraine, Finland, and others) even when most of the worst of its atrocities were known. I do know that Levenson, Sterling, et al are Jews and have done what I said they did. So, I don’t know, do you deal with facts, or do you do like the Nazis did and deny them.