Fundamentally Freund: SOS: Selective Outrage Syndrome

[shira]

Under the guise of enlightened progressivism, left-wing activists are actually advancing prejudice.

....


YET ANOTHER instance of this kind of thinking was on display earlier this week, when Palestinian Authority President Mahmoud Abbas made a statement worthy of American segregationists from the 1960s. “When a Palestinian state is established, it will be empty of any Israeli presence,” said our ostensible peace partner. “ If a Palestinian state is established with Jerusalem as its capital, we will object to the presence of even one Israeli in its territory. This is our position.”

That’s right. Abbas said it loudly and clearly: No Jews allowed. Despite the outright racist nature of his remarks, Abbas’s comments evoked nothing but silence on the liberal Left. There were no howls of protest, or denunciations of this blatant anti- Semitic rhetoric. Contrast this with the fury that erupted when a group of rabbis ruled last month that homes should not be rented to Arabs or other non- Jews. Once again, we see that the Left is quite ready to deplore a certain behavior by Jews, while ignoring similar conduct by Palestinians. Ironically, then, these liberals end up being the most vocal advocates of drawing distinctions between Jews and Arabs based only on who they are. Ummm, isn’t that racial discrimination? And so, under the guise of enlightened progressivism, left-wing activists are actually advancing prejudice.

To be fair, leftists are not the only ones plagued by SOS. There is plenty of it on the Right as well, only in the opposite direction. And of course there are quite a few thoughtful left-leaning people who still believe in upholding the principle of one standard for all. But they seem to have been drowned out by the more vocal, extreme elements.

It is to these radicals that I say: you can’t have it both ways. If you want to invoke noble values and ideals, that is truly wonderful. But the moment you start applying those principles inequitably, you become precisely that which you so fiercely condemn.

http://www.jpost.com/ArtsAndCulture/Entertainment/Article.aspx?id=201473

[sabbat hunter]

1. well to be fair

Abbas did say Israeli, not Jew.

It is to be expected that any settlements be removed from the WB and the people will leave once an accord is reached.

And I say this and I am in no way a big Abbas supporter.

[shira]

3. He means Jews.

Here's his chief spokesperson, Saeb Erekat, recently:

So, you think it would be necessary to first transfer and remove every Jew—

Absolutely. No, I’m not saying to transfer every Jew, I’m saying transfer Jews who, after an agreement with Israel, fall under the jurisdiction of a Palestinian state.

Any Jew who is inside the borders of Palestine will have to leave?

Absolutely. I think this is a very necessary step, before we can allow the two states to somehow develop their separate national identities, and then maybe open up the doors for all kinds of cultural, social, political, economic exchanges, that freedom of movement of both citizens of Israelis and Palestinians from one area to another. You know you have to think of the day after.

http://www.tabletmag.com/news-and-politics/48834/qa-maen-areikat/

And here's Abbas just 2 weeks ago...

"I'm willing to agree to a third party that would supervise the agreement, such as NATO forces, but I would not agree to having Jews among the NATO forces, or that there will live among us even a single Israeli on Palestinian land,” he was quoted by Wafa, the official Palestinian news agency.

A state without Jews

The Palestinians intend to demand the implementation of the UN resolution regarding refugees, from a Palestinian perspective, which gives the 5.5 million refugees and their descendants the right of return and to settle in the State of Israel. In his briefing to the Egyptian media, Abbas presented this strategy and denied the Jewish character of Israel. He maintains that Israel should, in fact, become a bi-national state, but on the other hand that Palestine must become a state “clean” of Jews.


The term “Israeli” used by Abbas means “Jew,” as the PA sees Israeli Arabs, Muslims and Christians alike as an integral part of the Palestinian people. The future State of Palestine, according Abbas, must resist any Jewish presence in its territory. In other words, the PA embraces a racist policy – Palestinian apartheid – directed at Jews, based on denial of Jewish history and the cultural and religious linkage of the Jewish people to the land.

The anti-Semitism embodied in Abbas’ words refers also to his position towards the NATO observers’ force that may be deployed in the West Bank to monitor the implementation of the peace agreement with Israel. He is opposed to Jews being included in this force; meaning, he will ask Germany and all other partner countries in NATO to use their own forces in the West Bank, in an effort to the exclude any Jewish soldiers.

He didn’t explain how these countries would determine who is a Jew, whether according to orthodox Jewish laws or just if one of the parents or grandparents was a Jew. But even Saudi Arabia didn’t dare oppose the deployment of American Jewish soldiers on its land during operation Desert Storm (1990-1), and no one in Israel ever demanded to disqualify Muslim soldiers from serving in the international observers’ forces in Lebanon, the Golan Heights and Sinai.

http://www.ynetnews.com/articles/0,7340,L-3929819,00.html

[Ken Burch]

6. You can't seriously argue that the Palestinians are obligated to let the settlements stay in place

in order to prove they aren't segregationists.

It goes without saying that if the settlements were allowed to stay, they'd tie up so much of the land that a Palestinian state couldn't survive.

It's about nationality, not religion or ethnicity.

[oberliner]

10. Should Jews be allowed to live in Hebron?

If they live under Palestinian jurisdiction under a newly created Palestinian state, do you think that would be a problem?

[Ken Burch]

12. I'm not sure on that one.

The ones who snuck in there in '67 have created a lot of bad blood, and that will have to be addressed.

[oberliner]

16. I think there was already some bad blood from 1929

And also from 1936.

The Jewish community has been driven out of Hebron (or slaughtered by Palestinians) on more than one occasion.

[Ken Burch]

20. There were an equal number of Palestinians killed in rioting tied to the same incident

Which all started with provocations by the Zionist side at the Wailing Wall.

It's not as if the Palestinians in Hebron just woke up one day and said "let's kill a bunch of them for the hell of it".

It was a volatile situation that got out of control(the 1929 situation)and BOTH sides bear equal blame.

And the people who moved to Hebron in '67(pretending they were just there for the weekend to attend a wedding), didn't just come in as people who wanted to quietly fit in. They wanted to proclaim Hebron as THEIR city, and NOT the Palestinians. They NEVER made any conciliatory gestures towards the Arab majority at all.

[oberliner]

23. That is a lie

And it wasn't started by any "provocations by the Zionist side at the Wailing Wall" - that was the invented pretext for the attack.

What the heck are your sources for this misinformation?

Both sides bear equal blame?? Good lord!

[Ken Burch]

30. My sources on that include Tom Segev

I assume you'd trust him on the subject.

[oberliner]

33. There is no source that claims that any non-Jewish people were killed in the 1929 Hebron Massacre

Let alone that more Arabs than Jews were killed in Hebron on that day.

It is simply not true.

[Ken Burch]

37. You're hairsplitting

I didn't say in the Hebron incident itself. I said in events caused by it, including retaliatory raids by Zionist forces who attacked Palestinians who weren't involved in what happened at Hebron at all.

[oberliner]

38. But we are talking about Hebron

In Hebron - in 1929, there was a massacre where a sizable number of Jewish people were murdered by Palestinians and many more were driven out. A few years later the British forced out the remainder of the Jewish population of that town.

Whether or not you think those actions were justified is your own business - but the facts are the facts and the above paragraph is not disputable.

[Ken Burch]

41. There should be compensation for anyone still living who was forced out of Hebron

or the survivors of anyone who was killed.

But the point of bringing up Hebron in this context is to stir up trouble.

This is something that can be addressed with compensation and apologies now, then talk of resettlement once hostilities have ended. It isn't justified to bring it up(as the Israeli hard Right does)to try to prevent a peace settlement or the establishment of a Palestinian state.

What matters is establishing that state and starting the overall reconciliation process. Matters like Hebron can be dealt with once peace is secured.

[mudplanet]

15. The whole point of the settlements is to make a functional Palestinian state impossible

[oberliner]

17. But Hebron's Jewish community pre-dates the state of Israel and any settlements

Don't you think the injustices of 1929 and 1936 ought to be rectified?

[Ken Burch]

21. That could be done with compensation.

Insisting that the religious whack-jobs who snuck in in '67 be allowed to stay wouldn't help anything. And it couldn't be a victory for progressive or humane values.

[mudplanet]

22. No. Or all injustices should be rectified.

Let's tally up all the Arabs killed by Jews, and all the Jews killed by Arabs, and if there's a discrepancy, kill enough to make it an even number. Then everyone can stop thirsting for revenge.

Or, let's stop supporting colonization and illegal dispossession of people's homes and land and figure out a way to go forward.

Let's make an honest attempt to follow international law regarding human rights.

[oberliner]

24. That is insane! Kill enough to make it an even number?

Good lord - what am I reading here?!

[mudplanet]

26. You're the one with a thrist for revenge, or what you call "recitifying injustices"

My response is, No. Let's move on and create a just situation for all now.

[oberliner]

35. I have no thirst for revenge or rectifying injustices

I do think Jewish people should be allowed to live in Hebron if they want to.

[shira]

28. If Abbas meant no settlers, that's one thing. He was quite clear he meant no Jews, period.

Not even NATO troops.

There's no excuse for his bigotry, not that it's surprising given what the PA does through its TV, radio, news, textbooks, religious sermons, etc... all state sponsored:
http://www.palwatch.org/

Let's not pretend the PA isn't ridiculously antisemitic and would make some Nazis blush.

[Ken Burch]

29. He just meant no Israelis, and you know it.

And if the Occupation weren't still in force, he probably wouldn't even have said THAT.

[shira]

32. So you think Abbas wants to toss out thousands of Arabs who live in Jewish settlements too?

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/32702595/ns/world_news-mideastn_africa

In 2007, the latest year with available statistics, about 1,300 of Pisgat Zeev's 42,000 residents were Arabs. In nearby French Hill, population 7,000, nearly one-sixth are Arabs, among them students at the neighboring Hebrew University of Jerusalem. Neve Yaakov, with 20,000 people, had 600 Arabs, according to the Israel Center for Jerusalem Studies, a respected think tank.

[Ken Burch]

34. The Arabs who livein Pisgat Zeev are NOT comparable to the West Bank settlers

They just ALWAYS lived in that area, and, unlike the West Bank settlers, they didn't drive anybody off of the land. You CANNOT honorably compare them to the crazies of Arutz Sheva.

[shira]

36. But they're Israelis, Ken. Now do you believe Abbas meant Israelis or Jews? n/t

[oberliner]

39. So clearly he is not talking about Israeli Arabs only Israeli Jews

Would that be accurate?

[Ken Burch]

42. He's talking about Israelis.

The Arabs in East Jerusalem are Palestinian. Their current citizenship status is beside the point.

This whole thing is about falsely equating the Palestinian Authority with Nazis and using that false equation to justify the hardline Israeli security status quo and the continued building of the West Bank settlements.

[oberliner]

43. Including Israeli Arabs?

Who are you to say which Israeli Arabs are Palestinian and which are not? To many of them, their current citizenship status is hardly beside the point. Aren't Israeli Arabs just as Israeli as Israeli Jews?

[Name removed]

44. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[oberliner]

45. And most Israeli Jews self-identify as "Jewish"

But in both cases, they are Israeli.

Lots of people inside Israel - including many Jewish communities - do not believe they have been treated as full equals in that society.

Regardless - they are all still Israelis.

I never use words like Judenrein or make any comparisons between any regional leaders and the Nazis. I certainly hope you are not implying otherwise.

My point - and you are welcome to dispute it if you'd like - is that Israeli Arabs are just as much Israeli as any other Israeli, regardless of whether they self-identify as Palestinian. Israeli citizens are Israeli citizens.

With that in mind, is Abbas talking about Israelis - all Israelis - or just Jewish Israelis?

[Ken Burch]

46. He's talking about the settlers who are Israeli citizens.

He's not saying any Jewish person on the planet.

And you may not use the word "Judenrein", but by backing up shira in this, you're participating in spreading her meme that "the Occupation CAN'T be ended because the 'Palestinian leadership' are saying or doing bad things."

She wants the Palestinian people, even though they have no control over what they're leaders say or do, to be placed under unending collective punishment until they get rid of those leaders and choose others of the Israeli government's liking.

She forgets that, everytime a Palestinian leadership is forced out, it is ONLY replaced by a harder-line leadership.

BTW, you should be aware of the fact that this statement is in response to Netanyahu's current insistence that, even under a "peace agreement", the IDF HAS to be allowed to keep a perpetual troop presence within the Palstinian state...and this, despite the fact that NO OTHER COUNTRY would ever tolerate its enemy in a war keeping its troops stationed within its territory even after the end of hostilities. In other words, even in "peace" Netanyahu is STILL insisting that the Occupation would just go on...indefinitely...with the IDF retaining the right to shut down the a new Palestinian state anytime the Israeli government claimed that "security" warrented it. If you actually WANT peace, this insistence SHOULD offend you to the core...because it's about not EVER ending the war and not EVER allowing the Palestinian people to truly have the right to self-determination.

[oberliner]

47. Fayyad has said that the Israeli settlers can stay in Palestine as equal citizens

This was as recently as an interview (with Tom Segev) that was published a week ago.

Are they not on the same page or maybe was Abbas trying to say something else?

[Ken Burch]

48. It is entirely possible that they are on different pages

I don't understand all the dynamics of internal Palestinian politics.

And, if we're going to accept(as the "pro-Israel" side insists)that sometime rhetoric is just rhetoric when THEY say controversial things, then we need to accept that for the Palestinian side as well.

[shira]

51. Ken, he's talking about Israeli settlers who are Jews, not the Arabs in the settlements

Seriously Ken, who are the non-Jewish Israeli settlers Abbas is referring to?

They're all Jews.

Why not just admit Abbas is referring to all Israeli Jews in the settlements?

See here also...
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=124&topic_id=340975&mesg_id=341092

[mudplanet]

2. The Post has as much credibility as CAMERA on this issue, which is

to say, none.

Israel is conducting a long-term campaign of depopulating Jerusalem and the West Bank of its Palestinians, as is plainly apparent to anyone who reads anything except Zionist propaganda.

And it's doing it courtesy of US tax dollars.

[oberliner]

4. Depopulating the West Bank of Palestinians?

That is preposterous.

The population of Palestinians in the West Bank and Gaza has steadily increased over the years.

There were approximately 2 million Palestinians living in the those territories in 1990 and there are over 4 million Palestinians living there today.

Where do you get the idea that the West Bank is being depopulated of Palestinians? That is pretty out there.

[Ken Burch]

7. Forcing Palestinians off of the land and giving all the good land to the settlers

Is pretty much the same as depopulating the place.

You can't make any land good that isn't good now...at least not in agricultural terms.

There's nothing left, after what the settlers have stolen.

[oberliner]

9. What land are the Palestinians being forced onto?

Wouldn't that land be in the West Bank?

Do you have any evidence that Palestinians have been forced by Israel to relocate out of the West Bank?

Depopulation of the West Bank would mean that the population of the West Bank is decreasing as a result war or forcible relocation. This is not happening. The population is increasing.

[Ken Burch]

11. They're being forced onto the nonusable land WITHIN the West Bank

They've been forced off the land they lived on for centuries, in many many cases.

[oberliner]

19. That cannot be entirely true as the agriculture sector is still a major industry in the West Bank

And, in any case, your statement that they are being moved onto other land within the West Bank indicates that you don't believe the West Bank is being depopulated either.

[mudplanet]

13. This question is disengenuous given all of the evidence I have provided

you over the last week or so. I'm wondering why you are requesting it since you already have it.

Multiple UN and human rights organizations have been reporting on the continuous Israeli campaign of building settlements and expanding existing settlements on the West Bank for over a decade, and of Israel's campaign of maintaining inhumane and unlivable living conditions for Palestinians living in the West Bank.

Good examples of this evidence has been provided over and over in this forum.

[oberliner]

18. You have provided no evidence of any Palestinians being driven out of the West Bank

The claim of depopulation you made has no evidence to support it, provided by you or anyone else.

Criticisms of the settlements do not equal the depopulation of the West Bank.

[mudplanet]

25. You've either got a really short memory or there are two oberliners here at DU

"Jub Al-Dib looks like a ghost town; no roads, no school but plenty of children, and run-down or abandoned homes.

In its latest report, Human Rights Watch says this village is living proof of a deliberate Israeli policy of racial discrimination against Palestinians that has had a devastating effect on this and other communities. The organization says Israel employs a two-tier system, which encourages and funds the building and infrastructure of Israeli settlements that enjoy all amenities while adjacent Palestinian communities are denied the right to any of those very services. So settlements grow, while these communities dwindle.

These Palestinian communities are under full Israeli control or Area C. Area C makes up over 60 per cent of the occupied West Bank with an estimated dwindling Palestinian population of 150,000."

Read the rest at http://blogs.aljazeera.net/middle-east/2010/12/20/racia...

The entire discussion that followed this post was about what the living conditions are like for Palestinians in the West Bank and how those conditions were created by and maintained by Israeli government policy.

Literally every human rights organization that has anything to do with the situation in the West Bank and in Jerusalem reports that it constitutes an apartheid-like environment in which Palestinians are treated as people with fewer rights than Israelis.

And, since you and your colleague insist that human rights organizations are untrustworthy regarding human rights issues, you can peruse international news and find a two decade long list of stories about Palestinians being forced from their homes by Israelis, being forced to live in conditions that resemble concentration camps, and having their human rights violated.

[oberliner]

40. I don't see how/why you would think that article makes any claim about depopulation of the West Bank

Are you reading the same text that I am?

Where do you think the people in those dwindling communities in Area C go to? Could it possibly be Area A or Area B? Both of which are part of the West Bank.

I am not arguing in favor of settlements or making any claims about life being wonderful for all the Palestinians across the West Bank. In fact, I agree with many of your premises and share most of your concerns.

It's only when you take things to ridiculous and demonstrably false extremes, such as claiming that the West Bank is being depopulated, that I take issue and make my objection to you characterizations known.

And I do not have any "colleagues" on this site - nor do I believe that human rights organizations are untrustworthy regarding human rights issues. Quite the contrary - I have the utmost respect for the many human rights organizations that are shedding light on this and other conflicts. I just criticized one of the groups that you brought up which has since been disbanded in part for the reasons I mentioned.

Edit to add: If you had posted something reasonable like saying that many Palestinians are being forced to leave their villages and move to other parts of the West Bank due to the Israeli settlement enterprise - I would have agreed with you.

[shira]

5. credible source please? n/t

[mudplanet]

14. 2006 map of settlements in West Bank and areas under Israeli control

The situation is considerably worse now vis a vis more settlements, existing settlements expanded, and now there is a giant concrete wall around some Palestinian areas.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Settlements2006.jpg

[Ken Burch]

8. This isn't about bigotry

It's not bigoted to be against letting the settlers stay.

None of them are there with positive intent...at least not towards the Palestinians.

The settlements are about conquest, not ethnic/religious equality, and they CANNOT have any progressive effect.

[shira]

27. Some settlers are Arabs, Ken...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AZyEmn4wjnY

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/32702595/ns/world_news-mideastn_africa/

http://www.upi.com/Top_News/International/2009/12/28/Jerusalem-approves-Arab-housing-units/UPI-81171262005573/

Abbas and Erekat say "no Jews allowed", not even NATO troops who are Jewish.

Don't excuse or minimize their bigotry.

[Name removed]

31. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[mudplanet]

49. This is a pernicious half truth, which is worse than a lie.

Any map will show that the West Bank is riddled with Israeli settlements, all of which are illegal but completely tolerated by the Israeli government.

99% of settlers are Jews.

[shira]

50. Why? Thousands of Arabs have decided to live in settlements along with Jews.

You think Abbas wants to toss them out of a future Palestine?

[mudplanet]

52. Throwing stones when you live in a glass house

Palestinian communities in East Jerusalem are waging a campaign of popular resistance against Israeli land confiscation. by Jesse Rosenfeld

"With Israel continuing to expand Jewish settlements in East Jerusalem, squeezing and displacing the Palestinian residents under the banner of an undivided Israeli capital (a claim rejected by most of the world), the Palestinian Authority has been powerless in defending the residents of their future capital. Meanwhile, despite murmurs of discontent from Washington and the international community, international diplomacy has proven just as ineffective in advocating for the rights of Jerusalem's Palestinian residents."

http://english.aljazeera.net/indepth/features/2010/12/2...