babble home
rabble.ca - news for the rest of us
today's active topics


Post New Topic  Post A Reply
FAQ | Forum Home
  next oldest topic   next newest topic
» babble   » current events   » international news and politics   » New UK Jewish group for "open debate" on Israel

Email this thread to someone!    
Author Topic: New UK Jewish group for "open debate" on Israel
aka Mycroft
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 6640

posted 05 February 2007 06:33 PM      Profile for aka Mycroft     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
quote:
A Time to Speak Out: Independent Jewish Voices

We are a group of Jews in Britain from diverse backgrounds, occupations and affiliations who have in common a strong commitment to social justice and universal human rights. We come together in the belief that the broad spectrum of opinion among the Jewish population of this country is not reflected by those institutions which claim authority to represent the Jewish community as a whole. We further believe that individuals and groups within all communities should feel free to express their views on any issue of public concern without incurring accusations of disloyalty.

We have therefore resolved to promote the expression of alternative Jewish voices, particularly in respect of the grave situation in the Middle East, which threatens the future of both Israelis and Palestinians as well as the stability of the whole region. We are guided by the following principles:

1. Human rights are universal and indivisible and should be upheld without exception. This is as applicable in Israel and the occupied Palestinian territories as it is elsewhere.

2. Palestinians and Israelis alike have the right to peaceful and secure lives.

3. Peace and stability require the willingness of all parties to the conflict to comply with international law.

4. There is no justification for any form of racism, including anti-Semitism, anti-Arab racism or Islamophobia, in any circumstance.

5. The battle against anti-Semitism is vital and is undermined whenever opposition to Israeli government policies is automatically branded as anti-Semitic.

These principles are contradicted when those who claim to speak on behalf of Jews in Britain and other countries consistently put support for the policies of an occupying power above the human rights of an occupied people. The Palestinian inhabitants of the West Bank and Gaza Strip face appalling living conditions with desperately little hope for the future. We declare our support for a properly negotiated peace between the Israeli and Palestinian people and oppose any attempt by the Israeli government to impose its own solutions on the Palestinians.

It is imperative and urgent that independent Jewish voices find a coherent and consistent way of asserting themselves on these and other issues of concern. We hereby reclaim the tradition of Jewish support for universal freedoms, human rights and social justice. The lessons we have learned from our own history compel us to speak out. We therefore commit ourselves to make public our views on a continuing basis and invite other concerned Jews to join and support us.

Current Signatories to the Declaration:

Dr Lisa Appignanesi

Dr Paul Auerbach

Pete Ayrton

Julia Bard

Sir Geoffrey Bindman

Jonathan Bloch

Prof Irene Bruegel

Jennie Buckman

Prof Brian Butterworth

Jane Caplan

Sarah Caplin

Beatrice Clarke

Barry Cohen

Prof Gerald Cohen

Prof Stan Cohen

Lady Ellen Dahrendorf

Jenny Diski

Professor Elizabeth Dore

Musa Moris Farhi

Nicole Farhi

Nina Farhi

Prof Stephan Feuchtwang

Prof Nina Fishman

Prof John Forrester

Dr Edie Friedman

Stephen Fry

Uri Fruchtman

Alexander Goehr

Rabbi Dr David Goldberg

Martin Golding

Geoffrey Goodman

Jeremy Green

Stephen Grosz

Dr Don Guttenplan

Michael Halpern

Michelle Hanson

Jenny Harris

Prof Margaret Harris

Abe Hayeem

Rosamine Hayeem

Prof Sue Himmelweit

Prof Eric Hobsbawm

Marlene Hobsbawm

Eva Hoffman

Luke Holland

Dr Anthony Isaacs

Dr Jeremy Isaacs

Prof Anne Janowitz

Lawrence Joffe

Ann Jungman

Prof Emanuel de Kadt

Dr Keith Kahn-Harris

Prof Cora Kaplan

Anne Karpf

Amira Katz-Goehr

Beeban Kidron

Reva Klein

Pam Kleinot

Dr Brian Klug

Prof Francesca Klug

Dr Tony Klug

Marion Kozak

Richard Kuper

Prof Tony Kushner

Michael Kustow

David Lan

Judith Lancet

Mike Leigh

Prof Stephen Lerman

Dr Mark Levene

Dr Carl Levy

Susan Loppert

Heinz Lubasz

Prof Steven Lukes

Deborah Maccoby

Dr Ruth Mandel

Dennis Marks

Prof Shula Marks

Mike Marqusee

Neil Martinson

Dr David Metz

Chris Mohr

Ian Montrose

Louise Morris

Paul Morrison

Turi Munthe

Braham Murray

Maurice Naftalin

Prof Mica Nava

Diana Neslen

Victoria Neumark

Prof Mike Newman

Carey Oppenheim

Prof Susie Orbach

Dr Kathy Panama

Prof Naomi Pfeffer

Adam Phillips

Caroline Pick

Prof Daniel Pick

Harold Pinter

Sigrid Rausing

Prof Sir Nigel Rodley

Prof Jacqueline Rose

Barbara Rosenbaum

David Rosenberg

Leon Rosselson

Anthony Rudolf

Ken Sabel

Prof Andrew Samuels

Rabbi Elizabeth Tikvah Sarah

Jess Wood Sarah

Prof Donald Sassoon

Ruth Schamroth

Dr Joseph Schwartz

Graeme Segal

Prof Lynne Segal

Ronald Segal

Susan Segal

Prof Richard Sennett

Prof Avi Shlaim

Rabbi Sheila Shulman

Dr Jonathan Sklar

Hazel Slavin

Gillian Slovo

Robyn Slovo

Shawn Slovo

Henry Stewart

Ruth Stone

Dr Judith Suissa

Susan Sutcliffe

Janet Suzman

Dr Barbara Taylor

Ruth Tenne

Asher Tlalim

Ronit Tlalim

Dr Elaine Unterhalter

Zoë Wanamaker

Eyal Weizman

Prof Sami Zubaida


See also Who speaks for Jews in Britain? by Brian Klug

British Jews break away from 'pro-Israeli' Board of Deputies (The Independent)

[ 05 February 2007: Message edited by: aka Mycroft ]


From: Toronto | Registered: Aug 2004  |  IP: Logged
Legless-Marine
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 13423

posted 05 February 2007 08:25 PM      Profile for Legless-Marine        Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by aka Mycroft:

See also Who speaks for Jews in Britain? by Brian Klug

British Jews break away from 'pro-Israeli' Board of Deputies (The Independent)

[ 05 February 2007: Message edited by: aka Mycroft ]


A day late and a dollar short. The Palestinians need a heck of a lot more than a lot of feel-good yackety yack.


From: Calgary | Registered: Oct 2006  |  IP: Logged
unionist
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 11323

posted 05 February 2007 08:34 PM      Profile for unionist     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
quote:
It is imperative and urgent that independent Jewish voices find a coherent and consistent way of asserting themselves on these and other issues of concern. We hereby reclaim the tradition of Jewish support for universal freedoms, human rights and social justice. The lessons we have learned from our own history compel us to speak out.

Wonderful! That expresses what has motivated me personally since my teens. As a Jew, I must be fearless in championing the cause of justice and enlightenment, especially when the so-called "Jewish" state foments war and aggression, and brings disgrace upon Jews everywhere simply by appropriating their name.

Thank you, aka Mycroft, for bringing this to our attention.

And Legless_Marine, you may think it's not enough - what would you suggest, sending guns? - but as far as I'm concerned, it's groundbreaking. Just look at the names on this list! I was personally happy to see Eric Hobsbawm there - and thrilled about Stephen Fry.


From: Vote QS! | Registered: Dec 2005  |  IP: Logged
siren
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 7470

posted 05 February 2007 08:37 PM      Profile for siren     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
Meanwhile, Canada's New Government seems to be charting a somewhat less progressive course.
From: Of course we could have world peace! But where would be the profit in that? | Registered: Nov 2004  |  IP: Logged
Boom Boom
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 7791

posted 05 February 2007 09:03 PM      Profile for Boom Boom     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by siren:
Meanwhile, Canada's New Government seems to be charting a somewhat less progressive course.

Actually, I believe the correct terminology now is "Canada's-Not-So-New-Government".


From: Make the rich pay! | Registered: Dec 2004  |  IP: Logged
Coyote
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 4881

posted 05 February 2007 09:35 PM      Profile for Coyote   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by unionist:

And Legless_Marine, you may think it's not enough - what would you suggest, sending guns? - but as far as I'm concerned, it's groundbreaking. Just look at the names on this list! I was personally happy to see Eric Hobsbawm there - and thrilled about Stephen Fry.


You should see the crap on one of the so-called "progressive" list-serves I'm on. It's actually normally quite good, but there is one woman in particular who seems to me to be motivated by disdain and blind hatred who leapt to castigate this near-unprecedented event as a cover for Zionist racism.

It is to weep.


From: O’ for a good life, we just might have to weaken. | Registered: Jan 2004  |  IP: Logged
unionist
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 11323

posted 05 February 2007 09:48 PM      Profile for unionist     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Coyote:
You should see the crap on one of the so-called "progressive" list-serves I'm on. It's actually normally quite good, but there is one woman in particular who seems to me to be motivated by disdain and blind hatred who leapt to castigate this near-unprecedented event as a cover for Zionist racism.

It is to weep.


It's bizarre how some people manage to have a knee-jerk reaction against any step forward.

I'm trying to imagine a statement as historic as this one signed by prominent members of the Jewish community in Canada. It would be a dream come true. Not that there aren't plenty of potential signatories. It would just require a monumental organizing drive to get the job done.


From: Vote QS! | Registered: Dec 2005  |  IP: Logged
Legless-Marine
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 13423

posted 05 February 2007 11:28 PM      Profile for Legless-Marine        Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by unionist:

And Legless_Marine, you may think it's not enough - what would you suggest, sending guns? - but as far as I'm concerned, it's groundbreaking. Just look at the names on this list! I was personally happy to see Eric Hobsbawm there - and thrilled about Stephen Fry.

My suggestions have already been documented in a thread titled practical assistance for Palestinians. Other than a few posts which suggested we need more "awareness", the discussion was mostly met with deafening disinterest.

A followup thread was created, condemning the "progressive" emphasis on awareness over action, but it was promptly nipped in the bud by one of the moderators, ostensibly because it resembled the previous thread. (???). Perhaps rabble was short on bytes that week, or perhaps I'm not on this moderator's "friends" list.

Meanwhile, a dozen Palestine threads have been created, the net worth of which has just been a lot of self gratifying yapping.

Activists discussing ethnic cleansing of Palestine, sharing articles, etc, would have been really helpful in 1995.

Lists of Jewish intellectuals coming forward and asking for "Open debate" could have been helpful in 2000.

But, here we are, in 2007. Palestinians have been isolated financially and geographically. Disaster and crisis doesn't even begin to describe their situation. "Calls for for Open Debate" are a decade late, and a billion dollars short. At this stage, it's hard to get excited about "Calls for open debate". I'm skeptical of the value, and can't help but wonder why it's taken these folks so long to step up.

I condemn it as nothing more than a feel-good baby fart.

What's happening to Palestinians is genocide in slow-mo. It's been going on for decades now, and activists need to catchup fast if they are truly interested in helping.

[ 05 February 2007: Message edited by: Legless-Marine ]


From: Calgary | Registered: Oct 2006  |  IP: Logged
remind
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 6289

posted 06 February 2007 12:16 AM      Profile for remind     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Legless-Marine:
My suggestions have already been documented in a thread...Other than a few posts which suggested we need more "awareness", the discussion was mostly met with deafening disinterest.

Oh, it seems your ego was hurt by this then, instead of condemning people for not responding how about looking at how it was presented by you.

quote:
..condemning the "progressive" emphasis on awareness over action, but it was promptly nipped in the bud by one of the moderators, ostensibly because it resembled the previous thread. (???). Perhaps rabble was short on bytes that week, or perhaps I'm not on this moderator's "friends list.

Now we can plainly see why NO ONE responded and why the thread was closed. AS condemning people always works so well, eh?

quote:
Meanwhile, a dozen Palestine threads have been created, the net worth of which has just been a lot of self gratifying yapping.

Seems like you're in the wrong forum then legless.

quote:
Activists discussing ethnic cleansing of Palestine, sharing articles, etc, would have been really helpful in 1995.

They were, but I guess others like you were NOT paying attention.

quote:
Lists of Jewish intellectuals coming forward and asking for "Open debate" could have been helpful in 2000.

They were trying to work with and org that was established long ago. Moreover, the move is about stealling Jewish voices and using them for Zionist purposes amongst other things and that has been happening recently not in 2000.

quote:
I'm skeptical of the value, and can't help but wonder why it's taken these folks so long to step up.

The value is huge have looked at the credentials of these people?

quote:
I condemn it as nothing more than a feel-good baby fart.

And how about taking a look at your baby farts?

quote:
What's happening to Palestinians is genocide in slow-mo. It's been going on for decades now, and activists need to catchup fast if they are truly interested in helping.

As I said look into some of these names on the list and actually see what they have been doing for years, before you condemn out of hand because of your self imposed ignorance of who these people are.


From: "watching the tide roll away" | Registered: Jun 2004  |  IP: Logged
Michelle
Moderator
Babbler # 560

posted 06 February 2007 04:41 AM      Profile for Michelle   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Legless-Marine:
A followup thread was created, condemning the "progressive" emphasis on awareness over action, but it was promptly nipped in the bud by one of the moderators, ostensibly because it resembled the previous thread. (???). Perhaps rabble was short on bytes that week, or perhaps I'm not on this moderator's "friends" list.

Or maybe because it was a duplicate thread with a topic that was covered just fine by the previous thread.


From: I've got a fever, and the only prescription is more cowbell. | Registered: May 2001  |  IP: Logged
Michelle
Moderator
Babbler # 560

posted 06 February 2007 04:45 AM      Profile for Michelle   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by unionist:
I'm trying to imagine a statement as historic as this one signed by prominent members of the Jewish community in Canada. It would be a dream come true. Not that there aren't plenty of potential signatories. It would just require a monumental organizing drive to get the job done.


What about the ACJC?


From: I've got a fever, and the only prescription is more cowbell. | Registered: May 2001  |  IP: Logged
unionist
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 11323

posted 06 February 2007 04:58 AM      Profile for unionist     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Michelle:

What about the ACJC?


The most important thing about the British initiative IMHO is the names - very prominent Jews from all walks of life. Do you mean "what about the ACJC" as a vehicle for such a campaign in Canada? Despite my respect for the ACJC and Eibie Weizfeld, it's unknown and so are its members. Who are its members, anyway?

The issue is not to produce the most "progressive" text possible (which the British group certainly has not done). It is to actually have prominent Canadian Jews clearly and publicly disassociating themselves from the pro-Israeli organizations that purport to speak in our name.


From: Vote QS! | Registered: Dec 2005  |  IP: Logged
aka Mycroft
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 6640

posted 06 February 2007 05:56 AM      Profile for aka Mycroft     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Michelle:

What about the ACJC?


From Who speaks for Jews in Britain? by Brian Klug:

quote:
Jews abroad who are confronted with the same climate are taking similar steps to make their voices heard. The Alliance of Concerned Jewish Canadians has been formed to promote "an alternative public Jewish voice" on Israeli policies. Last July "concerned South African Jews" appealed to "all who share our commitment to a common humanity" to call for Israel to stop its bombardment of Lebanon. In the past few years, Jewish groups speaking out against Israel's violations of human rights have proliferated, notably in the United States, but especially in Israel itself.

[ 06 February 2007: Message edited by: aka Mycroft ]


From: Toronto | Registered: Aug 2004  |  IP: Logged
quelar
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 2739

posted 06 February 2007 07:37 AM      Profile for quelar     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
In Legless' defense, this is very little very late, but hell, I really don't care, it's a step in the right direction.

Now hopefully we'll have some other progressives start stepping up and standing up for justice from the Jewish comminity in Canada.

Afterall, they're Canadians, and we want and like them here. I wouldn't want people from my ancestors country making claims about how ~I~ feel, I don't see why they should accept it.


From: In Dig Nation | Registered: Jun 2002  |  IP: Logged
unionist
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 11323

posted 06 February 2007 08:39 AM      Profile for unionist     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by quelar:
I wouldn't want people from my ancestors country making claims about how ~I~ feel, I don't see why they should accept it.

There is no historical or anthropological evidence I am aware of that European Jewry (and by extension most North American Jews) have any ancestry in the Middle East.

Just saying.

Even if my ancestors did come from there, I would still call racists and warmongers by their true name.


From: Vote QS! | Registered: Dec 2005  |  IP: Logged
edgewaters72
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 11649

posted 06 February 2007 08:42 PM      Profile for edgewaters72     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Legless-Marine:
I condemn it as nothing more than a feel-good baby fart.

I don't buy your argument. One of the most crucial elements to the implementation of Israeli policies with regards to the Palestinians is consent, and Israel invests massive amounts of time, money, and effort obtaining it from governments and supporters in Western nations. They put even more effort into assuring that dissent, in the mind of the uninformed voter, is a product exclusively of Islamic manipulations.

Statements like this rip away the underpinnings of consent among Western electorates, without which Israel would swiftly find itself isolated and unsupported, and thus incapable of maintaining its policies.

The most vital effort that might be made by the citizens of countries like Britain, Canada, or the United States against the Israeli policies is to tear aside the veils behind which Israel has obscured the issue. Direct action etc on the part of Western citizens could produce only a very minimal impact by comparison.


From: Kingston Ontario | Registered: Jan 2006  |  IP: Logged
aka Mycroft
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 6640

posted 07 February 2007 05:23 AM      Profile for aka Mycroft     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
From the Canadian Jewish News, Feb 17 2005, an article on Bernie Farber's assumption of the position of CEO of the Canadian Jewish Congress:
quote:

Farber predicted better co-ordination with other advocacy organizations, including CIC and those on campus. As the distinctions between anti-Semitism and anti-Zionism have receded, organizations that have addressed only one of these issues in the past must develop a more unified voice, he said.

Farber said his priorities include ensuring the security of the community from anti-Semitic attacks; bringing a positive message about Jewry to Canadians; and working with partners to educate Canadians about the links between anti-Semitism and anti-Zionism.


A dangerous trend of the past few years is the attempt to delegitimise and marginalise any and all criticism of Israel by declaring it as antisemitic. One of most insidious effects of this attempt is that it denudes the concept of antisemitism of much of its meaning by making it overly broad in application thus, perversely, making real antisemitism more acceptable.

Most recently, we have seen an attempt to blame liberal Jews who criticize Israel of facilitating antisemitism in a hamhanded attempt to silence them. Rather than be cowed we have seen people stand up and say no. This is a positive development and creates more space for legitimate criticism of Israel and reaffirms the very real difference between actual antisemitism and "anti-Zionism".


From: Toronto | Registered: Aug 2004  |  IP: Logged
unionist
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 11323

posted 07 February 2007 05:35 AM      Profile for unionist     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by aka Mycroft:

Most recently, we have seen an attempt to blame liberal Jews who criticize Israel of facilitating antisemitism in a hamhanded attempt to silence them. Rather than be cowed we have seen people stand up and say no.

Where? Is anything happening comparable to the British initiative? I'm asking out of a desire to know. The ACJC seems like a one-person show, but I admit to knowing very little about it.


From: Vote QS! | Registered: Dec 2005  |  IP: Logged
quelar
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 2739

posted 07 February 2007 06:28 AM      Profile for quelar     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by unionist:

There is no historical or anthropological evidence I am aware of that European Jewry (and by extension most North American Jews) have any ancestry in the Middle East.


I was going to make the point myself, but in the end 'where' a lot of people came from isn't as clear as they think it is, and the mythology of their 'heritage' becomes just as important as their actual heritage.


From: In Dig Nation | Registered: Jun 2002  |  IP: Logged
aka Mycroft
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 6640

posted 07 February 2007 09:36 AM      Profile for aka Mycroft     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by unionist:

Where?


I'm referring to the firestorm in the week or so over the essay "“‘Progressive’ Jewish Thought and the New Anti-Semitism" published by the American Jewish Committee.

See for instance
On Jewish critics of Israel

This editorial in Forward

When 'anti-Semitism' is diluted beyond recognition

[ 07 February 2007: Message edited by: aka Mycroft ]


From: Toronto | Registered: Aug 2004  |  IP: Logged
aka Mycroft
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 6640

posted 07 February 2007 09:39 AM      Profile for aka Mycroft     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
For more articles see
this google news search

From: Toronto | Registered: Aug 2004  |  IP: Logged
unionist
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 11323

posted 07 February 2007 10:03 AM      Profile for unionist     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
Thanks, aka Mycroft. I had seen some of these, but the others look fascinating and I appreciate the links.

But actually, when I said "Where?", I meant, "Where in Canada?" Has a single "prominent" Jew stood up to say, "Not in my name?" Again, I exclude the ACJC, because with the greatest of respect, no one out there has ever heard of it and I don't know anyone connected with it except Weizfeld (and maybe Michael Mandel?). Anyway, it has zero profile. Not its fault, just a fact.


From: Vote QS! | Registered: Dec 2005  |  IP: Logged
Michelle
Moderator
Babbler # 560

posted 07 February 2007 10:17 AM      Profile for Michelle   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
Well, I think Judy Rebick has. She's written lots of articles on this site about the situation in Palestine, particularly a series a few years ago about a fact-finding trip she made there.
From: I've got a fever, and the only prescription is more cowbell. | Registered: May 2001  |  IP: Logged
josh
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 2938

posted 07 February 2007 11:42 AM      Profile for josh     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
quote:

There is no historical or anthropological evidence I am aware of that European Jewry (and by extension most North American Jews) have any ancestry in the Middle East.


quote:

Although the historical record itself is very limited, there is a consensus of cultural, linguistic, and genetic evidence that the Ashkenazi Jewish population originated in the Middle East.


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ashkenazi_Jews

http://tinyurl.com/amcjk


From: the twilight zone between the U.S. and Canada | Registered: Aug 2002  |  IP: Logged
josh
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 2938

posted 07 February 2007 11:50 AM      Profile for josh     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
As for the AJC sponsored, and endorsed, smear piece:
quote:

Anti-semitism refers to hatred of Jews as a race. Before 1948, millions of Jews would have categorized themselves as anti-Zionist especially in Poland where the Socialist and anti-Zionist Jewish Bund was so powerful.

Anti-Zionist Jews were among the leaders of the fight against the Nazis and were at the forefront of every ghetto uprising. It is almost sacreligious to take the term anti-semite and apply it to Jews who are part of a long standing and quite venerable Jewish tradition. Were the socialist, Bundist and anti-Zionist Jews who fought and died in the Shoah fuelers of anti-semitism?

Surely the authors of this report know what anti-Zionism is and what anti-Semitism is. And they know the difference.

The reason for this report is that some conservative groups within our very liberal community are growing evermore frustrated by the fact that Jews have remained progressives, despite the attempts to convince one of the country's most wealthy groups that its interests lie with those who cut taxes on the wealthy, turn a cold shoulder to the poor, and want America to go to war with global Islam.

They have, for as long as I can remember, tried to use Israel as a device to bring Jews over to conservatism.


http://tinyurl.com/2ohekr


From: the twilight zone between the U.S. and Canada | Registered: Aug 2002  |  IP: Logged
Peech
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 9272

posted 07 February 2007 12:02 PM      Profile for Peech   Author's Homepage        Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
The Euston Manifesto

quote:
A. Preamble

We are democrats and progressives. We propose here a fresh political alignment. Many of us belong to the Left, but the principles that we set out are not exclusive. We reach out, rather, beyond the socialist Left towards egalitarian liberals and others of unambiguous democratic commitment. Indeed, the reconfiguration of progressive opinion that we aim for involves drawing a line between the forces of the Left that remain true to its authentic values, and currents that have lately shown themselves rather too flexible about these values. It involves making common cause with genuine democrats, whether socialist or not.


B. Statement of principles

1) For democracy.
We are committed to democratic norms, procedures and structures — freedom of opinion and assembly, free elections, the separation of legislative, executive and judicial powers, and the separation of state and religion. We value the traditions and institutions, the legacy of good governance, of those countries in which liberal, pluralist democracies have taken hold.

2) No apology for tyranny.
We decline to make excuses for, to indulgently "understand", reactionary regimes and movements for which democracy is a hated enemy — regimes that oppress their own peoples and movements that aspire to do so. We draw a firm line between ourselves and those left-liberal voices today quick to offer an apologetic explanation for such political forces.

3) Human rights for all.
We hold the fundamental human rights codified in the Universal Declaration to be precisely universal, and binding on all states and political movements, indeed on everyone. Violations of these rights are equally to be condemned whoever is responsible for them and regardless of cultural context. We reject the double standards with which much self-proclaimed progressive opinion now operates, finding lesser (though all too real) violations of human rights which are closer to home, or are the responsibility of certain disfavoured governments, more deplorable than other violations that are flagrantly worse. We reject, also, the cultural relativist view according to which these basic human rights are not appropriate for certain nations or peoples.


6) Opposing anti-Americanism.
We reject without qualification the anti-Americanism now infecting so much left-liberal (and some conservative) thinking. This is not a case of seeing the US as a model society. We are aware of its problems and failings. But these are shared in some degree with all of the developed world. The United States of America is a great country and nation. It is the home of a strong democracy with a noble tradition behind it and lasting constitutional and social achievements to its name. Its peoples have produced a vibrant culture that is the pleasure, the source-book and the envy of millions. That US foreign policy has often opposed progressive movements and governments and supported regressive and authoritarian ones does not justify generalized prejudice against either the country or its people.

7) For a two-state solution.
We recognize the right of both the Israeli and the Palestinian peoples to self-determination within the framework of a two-state solution. There can be no reasonable resolution of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict that subordinates or eliminates the legitimate rights and interests of one of the sides to the dispute.

8) Against racism.
For liberals and the Left, anti-racism is axiomatic. We oppose every form of racist prejudice and behaviour: the anti-immigrant racism of the far Right; tribal and inter-ethnic racism; racism against people from Muslim countries and those descended from them, particularly under cover of the War on Terror. The recent resurgence of another, very old form of racism, anti-Semitism, is not yet properly acknowledged in left and liberal circles. Some exploit the legitimate grievances of the Palestinian people under occupation by Israel, and conceal prejudice against the Jewish people behind the formula of "anti-Zionism". We oppose this type of racism too, as should go without saying.

9) United against terror.
We are opposed to all forms of terrorism. The deliberate targeting of civilians is a crime under international law and all recognized codes of warfare, and it cannot be justified by the argument that it is done in a cause that is just. Terrorism inspired by Islamist ideology is widespread today. It threatens democratic values and the lives and freedoms of people in many countries. This does not justify prejudice against Muslims, who are its main victims, and amongst whom are to be found some of its most courageous opponents. But, like all terrorism, it is a menace that has to be fought, and not excused.

10) A new internationalism.
We stand for an internationalist politics and the reform of international law — in the interests of global democratization and global development. Humanitarian intervention, when necessary, is not a matter of disregarding sovereignty, but of lodging this properly within the "common life" of all peoples. If in some minimal sense a state protects the common life of its people (if it does not torture, murder and slaughter its own civilians, and meets their most basic needs of life), then its sovereignty is to be respected. But if the state itself violates this common life in appalling ways, its claim to sovereignty is forfeited and there is a duty upon the international community of intervention and rescue. Once a threshold of inhumanity has been crossed, there is a "responsibility to protect".

11) A critical openness.
Drawing the lesson of the disastrous history of left apologetics over the crimes of Stalinism and Maoism, as well as more recent exercises in the same vein (some of the reaction to the crimes of 9/11, the excuse-making for suicide-terrorism, the disgraceful alliances lately set up inside the "anti-war" movement with illiberal theocrats), we reject the notion that there are no opponents on the Left. We reject, similarly, the idea that there can be no opening to ideas and individuals to our right. Leftists who make common cause with, or excuses for, anti-democratic forces should be criticized in clear and forthright terms. Conversely, we pay attention to liberal and conservative voices and ideas if they contribute to strengthening democratic norms and practices and to the battle for human progress.

This opposes us not only to those on the Left who have actively spoken in support of the gangs of jihadist and Baathist thugs of the Iraqi so-called resistance, but also to others who manage to find a way of situating themselves between such forces and those trying to bring a new democratic life to the country. We have no truck, either, with the tendency to pay lip service to these ends, while devoting most of one's energy to criticism of political opponents at home (supposedly responsible for every difficulty in Iraq), and observing a tactful silence or near silence about the ugly forces of the Iraqi "insurgency". The many left opponents of regime change in Iraq who have been unable to understand the considerations that led others on the Left to support it, dishing out anathema and excommunication, more lately demanding apology or repentance, betray the democratic values they profess.

Vandalism against synagogues and Jewish graveyards and attacks on Jews themselves are on the increase in Europe. "Anti-Zionism" has now developed to a point where supposed organizations of the Left are willing to entertain openly anti-Semitic speakers and to form alliances with anti-Semitic groups. Amongst educated and affluent people are to be found individuals unembarrassed to claim that the Iraq war was fought on behalf of Jewish interests, or to make other "polite" and subtle allusions to the harmful effect of Jewish influence in international or national politics — remarks of a kind that for more than fifty years after the Holocaust no one would have been able to make without publicly disgracing themselves. We stand against all variants of such bigotry.

The violation of basic human rights standards at Abu Ghraib, at Guantanamo, and by the practice of "rendition", must be roundly condemned for what it is: a departure from universal principles, for the establishment of which the democratic countries themselves, and in particular the United States of America, bear the greater part of the historical credit. But we reject the double standards by which too many on the Left today treat as the worst violations of human rights those perpetrated by the democracies, while being either silent or more muted about infractions that outstrip these by far. This tendency has reached the point that officials speaking for Amnesty International, an organization which commands enormous, worldwide respect because of its invaluable work over several decades, can now make grotesque public comparison of Guantanamo with the Gulag, can assert that the legislative measures taken by the US and other liberal democracies in the War on Terror constitute a greater attack on human rights principles and values than anything we have seen in the last 50 years, and be defended for doing so by certain left and liberal voices.



Signatories to Euston Manifesto


From: Babbling Brook | Registered: May 2005  |  IP: Logged
josh
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 2938

posted 07 February 2007 12:18 PM      Profile for josh     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
Oh brother. Not the Euston Manifesto.

Yes, Euston. We have a problem.

quote:

The manifesto signers do not consider that the "legitimate grievances of the Palestinian people under occupation by Israel" arise because the Palestinians are the victims of Israel's racism. In this connection, what about Principle #3. "Human rights for all"? Do they really mean all, even including Palestinians? In that case they would be severely critical of Israel, but they are not. Dissent magazine's editor, Michael Walzer, actually endorsed Israel's 1982 invasion of Lebanon! To the manifesto signers, anyone accusing Israel of systematic racism against the Palestinians is guilty of "anti-Zionism", and of course this equals anti-Semitism. So there you have it! Anyone accusing Israel of racism must be an anti-Semite!

. . . .

The Euston Manifesto was written by social democrats who support the US invasion and occupation of Iraq. They are pleading for support from other leftists and from the broader community of liberals.


http://www.counterpunch.org/farley05272006.html

And with signatories such as Michael Ledeen and Marty Peretz, why am I not surprised.


From: the twilight zone between the U.S. and Canada | Registered: Aug 2002  |  IP: Logged
Peech
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 9272

posted 07 February 2007 12:42 PM      Profile for Peech   Author's Homepage        Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
Independent Jewish Voices

quote:
The group's founding principles include fighting racism in general, including anti-Semitism, Islamophobia and Arab hatred. The group has not formulated its stand vis-a-vis a solution to the Israeli-Palestinian confict, beyond declaring its support for "Israelis and Palestinians' equal right to live in peace and security" and the need for all parties to obey international law.

And From Euston Manifesto

quote:
7) For a two-state solution.
We recognize the right of both the Israeli and the Palestinian peoples to self-determination within the framework of a two-state solution. There can be no reasonable resolution of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict that subordinates or eliminates the legitimate rights and interests of one of the sides to the dispute.

8) Against racism.
For liberals and the Left, anti-racism is axiomatic. We oppose every form of racist prejudice and behaviour: the anti-immigrant racism of the far Right; tribal and inter-ethnic racism; racism against people from Muslim countries and those descended from them, particularly under cover of the War on Terror. The recent resurgence of another, very old form of racism, anti-Semitism, is not yet properly acknowledged in left and liberal circles. Some exploit the legitimate grievances of the Palestinian people under occupation by Israel, and conceal prejudice against the Jewish people behind the formula of "anti-Zionism". We oppose this type of racism too, as should go without saying.



From: Babbling Brook | Registered: May 2005  |  IP: Logged
Petsy
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 12553

posted 07 February 2007 12:56 PM      Profile for Petsy        Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
The statement signed by the UK Jews at the start of this thread is in my view fine.

It speaks of a two-state solution it does not engage in excessive rhetoric and is fair to what is happening. The ACJC comes nowhere close to such language.


From: Toronto | Registered: May 2006  |  IP: Logged
unionist
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 11323

posted 07 February 2007 02:11 PM      Profile for unionist     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Michelle:
Well, I think Judy Rebick has. She's written lots of articles on this site about the situation in Palestine, particularly a series a few years ago about a fact-finding trip she made there.

I guess I didn't make myself clear, and I want to tread gently here. We need "prominent mainstream Jews" who are not well-known left-wing activist icons to stand up and be counted. I know for a fact that there are lots of them who can't stand what Israel is doing, can't stand the Occupation or the Wall, and are sick about being tarred with that brush by the "official" organizations - but don't know what to say and how to say it.

Here's what I'm saying: You don't have to be a left-wing activist to stand for justice in the Middle East. Just as you don't need to be a leftist to hate GW Bush, to support same-sex marriage, to oppose racism, to want Canada out of Afghanistan. That's the message we need to get across. That's what the British Jews are starting to do.


From: Vote QS! | Registered: Dec 2005  |  IP: Logged
unionist
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 11323

posted 07 February 2007 02:13 PM      Profile for unionist     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Petsy:
The statement signed by the UK Jews at the start of this thread is in my view fine.

It speaks of a two-state solution ...


No, actually, it does not. It is neutral on that question.


From: Vote QS! | Registered: Dec 2005  |  IP: Logged
Petsy
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 12553

posted 07 February 2007 02:23 PM      Profile for Petsy        Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
Yes you are right however by being neutral it speaks volumes. I would venture to suggest that many would have refused to sign had it supported a "bi-national" state
From: Toronto | Registered: May 2006  |  IP: Logged
Cueball
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 4790

posted 07 February 2007 02:25 PM      Profile for Cueball   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by aka Mycroft:
A dangerous trend of the past few years is the attempt to delegitimise and marginalise any and all criticism of Israel by declaring it as antisemitic. One of most insidious effects of this attempt is that it denudes the concept of antisemitism of much of its meaning by making it overly broad in application thus, perversely, making real antisemitism more acceptable.

Right.


From: Out from under the bridge and out for a stroll | Registered: Dec 2003  |  IP: Logged
unionist
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 11323

posted 07 February 2007 02:32 PM      Profile for unionist     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Petsy:
Yes you are right however by being neutral it speaks volumes. I would venture to suggest that many would have refused to sign had it supported a "bi-national" state

I agree with you, and I think it's very wrong for foreigners to dictate the structure of a solution to the parties directly involved. For me personally, the urgent task is to end the occupation, tear down the wall, and halt all military attacks and incursions by any party. If Jews around the world could stand up and be counted on at least that much, it might even help Israel to resist the settlers and others who thrive on war and aggression.


From: Vote QS! | Registered: Dec 2005  |  IP: Logged
Cueball
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 4790

posted 07 February 2007 02:39 PM      Profile for Cueball   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
But isn't that the rub? Isn't it basicly the fact that the Israeli economy and the huge subsidies that it recieves from the US are dependent on the war economy, and that those vested interests dictate the need for a status quo of constant conflict?
From: Out from under the bridge and out for a stroll | Registered: Dec 2003  |  IP: Logged
unionist
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 11323

posted 07 February 2007 03:07 PM      Profile for unionist     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Cueball:
But isn't that the rub? Isn't it basicly the fact that the Israeli economy and the huge subsidies that it recieves from the US are dependent on the war economy, and that those vested interests dictate the need for a status quo of constant conflict?

Millions of Israelis want peace. Yes, there are vested interests that profit from the war economy and foreign inputs of cash. But they can be isolated. The joint efforts of Jews abroad with the temporarily suppressed peace movement in Israel can be a powerful force in changing the status quo. If only the Palestinians could wake up and give rise to leaders of a higher calibre than Fatah and Hamas... and stop fighting each other... anyway, one brick at a time.


From: Vote QS! | Registered: Dec 2005  |  IP: Logged
Frustrated Mess
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 8312

posted 07 February 2007 03:43 PM      Profile for Frustrated Mess   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
quote:
If only the Palestinians could wake up and give rise to leaders of a higher calibre than Fatah and Hamas... and stop fighting each other... anyway, one brick at a time.

Whoa there! That is pretty much treading on the edge. Why do you think Palestinians have failed to give rise to "higher calibre" leaders and what would such leaders represent?


From: doom without the gloom | Registered: Feb 2005  |  IP: Logged
Legless-Marine
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 13423

posted 07 February 2007 05:12 PM      Profile for Legless-Marine        Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by unionist:

If only the Palestinians could wake up and give rise to leaders of a higher calibre than Fatah and Hamas... and stop fighting each other... anyway, one brick at a time.

Wow, for someone who yaks alot about being a supporter of Palestinians, you're pretty quick to perpetuate zionist crap.

Make no mistake, Palestinian civil war is a direct product of the Zionist master plan, and it's ocurrence is by design. It is the evitable outcome when people are bottled up and starved.

This is the really juicy part where Palestinians kill each other off, saving Israel the trouble. It's enough to send a Zionist into an onanistic frenzy.

Perhaps if we post more we can get some more "Jewish intellectuals" to sign a petition, Palestinians will stop having to kill each other for scraps.

[ 07 February 2007: Message edited by: Legless-Marine ]


From: Calgary | Registered: Oct 2006  |  IP: Logged
Legless-Marine
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 13423

posted 07 February 2007 05:24 PM      Profile for Legless-Marine        Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by remind:

quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Originally posted by Legless-Marine:
My suggestions have already been documented in a thread...Other than a few posts which suggested we need more "awareness", the discussion was mostly met with deafening disinterest.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------


Oh, it seems your ego was hurt by this then, instead of condemning people for not responding how about looking at how it was presented by you.


My concern is first, and foremost for those suffering in Palestine. An impressive amount of noise is made on these forums about their plight, but there is disappointing lack of interest in taking it beyond that.

I've taken the time to document and list some practical and accessible methods of giving *REAL* support to Palestinians.

I urge anyone who considers themselves to be a supporter of Palestinians to take a look at the list, and find a method of practical support that falls within their means.

[ 07 February 2007: Message edited by: Legless-Marine ]


From: Calgary | Registered: Oct 2006  |  IP: Logged
unionist
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 11323

posted 07 February 2007 05:30 PM      Profile for unionist     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Frustrated Mess:

Whoa there! That is pretty much treading on the edge. Why do you think Palestinians have failed to give rise to "higher calibre" leaders and what would such leaders represent?


I'm not a fool. I know how the U.S., British and French, with Israel as their tool, worked hard to destroy any democratic or socialist nationalist movement among the Arab peoples (and elsewhere in the ex-colonies). I know how they discredited and destroyed the Nassers and the Arbenzes and the Allendes and the Mossadeghs and the Sukarnos and the Habashes and the Arafats... many places, many different features... and promoted instead the oil lackeys and the religious fanatics. I understand about divide and rule.

But the Palestinians and their Arab fitful "allies" were slow to figure all this out. First they had slogans of driving the Jews into the sea. Then they embarked on adventurist military campaigns (either large-scale or guerrilla) which somehow always ended in total defeat. They forgot to organize their own people - who, in 1987, shocked the world by rising up and showing that they were a torrential force that no one could defeat. Who led that uprising? Who welded it into a political force? No one. The youth with their stones put the "leaders" to shame, and their struggle was squandered.

And so on, until Arafat, outmanoeuvred, humiliated, surrounded by corruption, left the scene, his life's mission no closer to achievement. And then the ultimate humiliation, the people in desperation voting for the suicide bombers and religious zealots. How sad, after so many decades of resistance.

I would like to see a Castro; a Chavez; or many lesser mortals; someone, anyone, that can embody the spirit of this heroic people, who never gets desperate, who avoids the twin shoals of terrorism and sell-out, and who boldly declares that one of the last racist colonial outposts in the world has decided, now, to throw off its shackles. I see no one. You want to blame Israel and the U.S.? You are absolutely right. But it changes nothing.


From: Vote QS! | Registered: Dec 2005  |  IP: Logged
Cueball
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 4790

posted 07 February 2007 05:57 PM      Profile for Cueball   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
Yuri Avnery is on record as saying that he believes Arafat was poisoned, and that, despite his obvious and multiple failings, was at least a Palestinian leader who could bring unity to their movement, and that his assassination was calculated to bring about the state of affairs we have today.

That his him. On the other hand it is completely clear and evident that Israeli acively encouraged and fostered the Muslim Brotherhood and Sheik Ahmed Yassin as a strategy deliberately designed to devide the Palestinian movemen between the secular and the religious movement, explicitly as well between Fatah of the West Bank, and Gaza and the religious militants there.


From: Out from under the bridge and out for a stroll | Registered: Dec 2003  |  IP: Logged
unionist
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 11323

posted 07 February 2007 06:01 PM      Profile for unionist     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
Correct, Cueball. Absolutely correct. The trouble is, it worked and it keeps on working. A leadership must arise in Palestine, because no one can liberate the people but the people themselves.
From: Vote QS! | Registered: Dec 2005  |  IP: Logged
Cueball
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 4790

posted 07 February 2007 06:07 PM      Profile for Cueball   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
It seems to me that with the US actively arming the Fatah security forces, that Abbas has taken on Arafat's Quisling roll, without Arafat's legitimacy as a spokesperson for the Palestinian cause.
From: Out from under the bridge and out for a stroll | Registered: Dec 2003  |  IP: Logged
Frustrated Mess
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 8312

posted 07 February 2007 06:20 PM      Profile for Frustrated Mess   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
So why haven't Israelis awaken and given rise to leaders of a higher caliber than Sharon, and Olmert, and Netanyahu, and Lieberman?
From: doom without the gloom | Registered: Feb 2005  |  IP: Logged
unionist
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 11323

posted 07 February 2007 06:33 PM      Profile for unionist     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Frustrated Mess:
So why haven't Israelis awaken and given rise to leaders of a higher caliber than Sharon, and Olmert, and Netanyahu, and Lieberman?

There must be a name for this fallacy, but I can't think of it. Non sequitur, perhaps?

Anyway, forget that I actually dared to make an obvious point about the abject failure of the Palestinians to mount any kind of successful resistance after all these years, so that you have asinine characters accusing me of spouting "zionist crap". Have a look at Hezbollah, and you may start to fathom what I'm talking about. Or don't, I can't force you, suit yourselves.


From: Vote QS! | Registered: Dec 2005  |  IP: Logged
Cueball
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 4790

posted 07 February 2007 06:43 PM      Profile for Cueball   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
I personally think that focus on the apparent inabilities of the Palestinian leadership, smacks a little of the blaming the victim mantra served daily in the Zionist press. The fact is that not being able to produce results, is not necessarily a failure of the leadership, but sometimes a fact of the odds against.

I don't think Salvador Allende's failure to foresee and repress Pinochet's coupe, necessarily reflects badly upon him, and perhaps even reflecs well upon him, in that he stuck by the rule of law and the Chilean constitution.

Likewise, the fact that Arafat allowed himself to be duped during the Oslo process is as much an indication of his willingness to roll the dice on a possible peaceful solution, despite the fact that in doing so he gave massive concessions right from the get go. The fact that the gamble failed does not necessarily indicate that he did not have the qualities of a competent leader. In fact, his ability to keep the fractious Palestinian movement in one piece despite the odds and the kind of concession he made speak of a certain capability, at least within his own ranks.

So, success and failure are not merely an advent of leadership, but also result from objective conditions.

Castro for instance, would likely not be around today were not Kruschev adamant about supporting him after the Bay of Pigs. Having Strong allies is not something which can be claimed by the Palestinians, some of whose allies, like the Hashemite Kings, are hardly worth the title of ally at all. The Palestinians, (and their leaders) more often than not have been playing cards in the hands of other regional powers, and discarded when convenient.

[ 07 February 2007: Message edited by: Cueball ]


From: Out from under the bridge and out for a stroll | Registered: Dec 2003  |  IP: Logged
Kevin_Laddle
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 8163

posted 07 February 2007 06:46 PM      Profile for Kevin_Laddle   Author's Homepage        Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
Debate, debate, debate... Seems what this issues needs is a lot less debate, empty resolutions, and rhetoric, and a lot more action. Until Israel is willing to come clean, and renounce the countless atrocities, and acts of terrorism it has commited against the Palestinian people and the state of Palestine, I have little time for what it's apologists have to say.

Israel is a terrorist state. Just ask the families of the victims of the Qana massacre. Or we all remember this one: ISRAEL MURDERS CANADIANS

[ 07 February 2007: Message edited by: Kevin_Laddle ]


From: ISRAEL IS A TERRORIST STATE. ASK THE FAMILIES OF THE QANA MASSACRE VICTIMS. | Registered: Feb 2005  |  IP: Logged
unionist
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 11323

posted 07 February 2007 06:50 PM      Profile for unionist     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Cueball:
I personally think that focus on the apparent inabilities of the Palestinian leadership, smacks a little of the blaming the victim mantra served daily in the Zionist press. The fact is that not being able to produce results, is not necessarily a failure of the leadership, but sometimes a fact of the odds against.

Forget it. I'm sorry. They have wonderful leaders, great organization. They just have no allies and are outgunned. As long as we know whom to blame, we don't need to look any deeper.

Now explain to me about Hezbollah.


From: Vote QS! | Registered: Dec 2005  |  IP: Logged
Cueball
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 4790

posted 07 February 2007 06:59 PM      Profile for Cueball   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
Israeli power is not infinite. It can not occupy the West Bank, gaza and Lebanon up to the Litani. It is not that simple of course, and there are other factors. One of these would be that the Lebabese have had considerable breathing room, and as such have been able to build up a military infrastructure, while Syria has acted as an effecive balance to Israeli power in the proxy war.

I could say more, but there really is no need.


From: Out from under the bridge and out for a stroll | Registered: Dec 2003  |  IP: Logged
melovesproles
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 8868

posted 07 February 2007 07:05 PM      Profile for melovesproles     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
I'm not an expert at all on Palestinian politics but Mustafa Barghouti sounds like he stands for some of the right things. And he was greeted with a predictably brutal response from Israel and no attention from the west or its media.

Mustafa Barghouti

But honestly, I dont see how Palestinians actually can be expected not to elect warmongerers when countries with absolutely no legitimate reason for fielding hawks like Canada are riding the current global wave of war and brute aggression.

At this point in history I can see why nonviolence is losing its currency in some parts of the world.


From: BC | Registered: Apr 2005  |  IP: Logged
Frustrated Mess
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 8312

posted 07 February 2007 07:08 PM      Profile for Frustrated Mess   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
I agree there is no need. The assassinations, the deportations, the concentration camps, the malnutrition, the depravation, the constant surveillance, and imagine the Palestinians don't have a leadership to the liking of some Canadian babblers. It is just mind blowing. I mean, they have had every opportunity to establish and groom their young to take control of the resistance in between ducking Israeli sniper fire.

I would argue the very fact that Palestinians continue to mount a resistance, with or without leaders acceptable to our satisfaction, speaks volumes of the human desire and expression for freedom and puts a damned lie to cynical Israeli claims to democracy, human rights, and a place among civilized nations.

[ 07 February 2007: Message edited by: Frustrated Mess ]


From: doom without the gloom | Registered: Feb 2005  |  IP: Logged
quart o' homomilk
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 13309

posted 07 February 2007 07:10 PM      Profile for quart o' homomilk     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
They had some leadership,
Anyone remember Haidar Abdel Shafi? Soft, pragmatic, democratically-elected...given the Sword of Damocles by Israel when he dared to bring the question of settlements into negotiations. Association with Hezbollah is a failure, I agree, and they're as bad to Lebanese as they are for Palestine. But I don't think Palestinians really get to choose their friends anymore.
As for leadership, they've still got some. It's hiding, we have to look beyond the zealots and loudmouths. But it's a hard knock life in there. With this civil war going on the coast isn't clear for, say, Sari Nusseibeh to just crawl out of his shell. If you threaten anyone's turf you can die on the spot.

From: saturday | Registered: Oct 2006  |  IP: Logged
unionist
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 11323

posted 07 February 2007 07:52 PM      Profile for unionist     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Frustrated Mess:

I would argue the very fact that Palestinians continue to mount a resistance, with or without leaders acceptable to our satisfaction, speaks volumes of the human desire and expression for freedom and puts a damned lie to cynical Israeli claims to democracy, human rights, and a place among civilized nations.

I agree wholeheartedly with that.

The first part of your post is not analysis, it's rationalization, or some kind of plea for sympathetic understanding. I still want to know who betrayed the struggle and the dreams of the heroes of the First Intifadah.

People around the world, from South Africa to Viet Nam to "Rhodesia" to Iran to Kenya to China to East Timor to Cuba were subjugated, oppressed, treated as sub-human, surrounded, deported - they all produced leaders and organizations which were able, at least for a time, to unite the people and overthrow the oppressors.

When will that happen for the Palestinians? After the enemy stops behaving so badly!? Effect first, then cause?


From: Vote QS! | Registered: Dec 2005  |  IP: Logged
Coyote
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 4881

posted 07 February 2007 11:01 PM      Profile for Coyote   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
I want to endorse the broad strokes, without getting into the particulars, of what unionist has said here - and express my dismay that his simple statement of fact (that the Palestinians have been ill-served by their leadership) has been met with such scorn.

The Palestinians are divided. And they are divided, in the main, by thuggish armed groups who are fighting over territory and prestige. The Israeli military analysis is that Gaza is falling back into clan rule, and that they should stay out of it. Their analysis is basically correct, from what I understand from friends in Palestine and connected to it (granted, most of those are in the West Bank, and there's a whole history of division there that I don't want to get into).

Look, noting those facts doesn't de-legitimize the call for Palestinian self-determination. I've said it before and I'll say it again, Human Rights are NOT a reward for good behaviour; they are rights.

There are thousands of Palestinians who live lives of resistance to occupation, who organize in their communities to blunt the most awful excesses of the occupation, and to educate their children, and to give some semblance of normalcy to an absurd existence under Israeli rule. Their lives are made the more difficult by armed groups who care not for the reprecussions of their morbid and futile actions.

One of the great moral moments of the South African resistance was the image of Desmond Tutu wading into a crowd of incensed townshippers ready to execute a collaborator. Through sheer force of moral will and stature, he was able to put an end to that obscenity. It ranks, in my mind, up there with the unnamed young man who stood by himself in front of the Chinese tanks in Tiennamen.

It is not anti-Palestinian to wish that such leaders would arise from the crucible of occupation; it is deepest folly to think that the bloated and corrupt Fatah or the doctrinaire leadership of Hamas can provide such leadership.

Unionist is no apologist for Israel. And I welcome a perusal of my posting history to any who want to question my bona fides on this issue.

Please, don't try to cut down discussion of what is a very important element in the liberation of Palestine: the leadership of the Palestinian people.


From: O’ for a good life, we just might have to weaken. | Registered: Jan 2004  |  IP: Logged
Cueball
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 4790

posted 07 February 2007 11:11 PM      Profile for Cueball   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
I am not going to sit over here and dictate to Palestinians the terms upon which I will accept their leadership, or pretend that I have the kind of intimate knowledge of the situation to discern the nature of the internal politics. This idea is absurd to me.
From: Out from under the bridge and out for a stroll | Registered: Dec 2003  |  IP: Logged
Coyote
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 4881

posted 07 February 2007 11:15 PM      Profile for Coyote   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
But is that what I am suggesting? I don't think so. I consider myself a political opponent of Hamas, for example, but I accept the democratic will of the Palestinian people.

If I am cynical about Hamas, and despair of their leadership, it is because I think both their ideology and their governance is a detriment to the cause of Palestinian self-determination.


From: O’ for a good life, we just might have to weaken. | Registered: Jan 2004  |  IP: Logged
Legless-Marine
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 13423

posted 07 February 2007 11:24 PM      Profile for Legless-Marine        Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by unionist:

People around the world, from South Africa to Viet Nam to "Rhodesia" to Iran to Kenya to China to East Timor to Cuba were subjugated, oppressed, treated as sub-human, surrounded, deported - they all produced leaders and organizations which were able, at least for a time, to unite the people and overthrow the oppressors.


... And likewise, there are many long-passed people around the world who didn't have such success.

Speaking of Cuba, how's that thriving Taino resistance doing these days?


From: Calgary | Registered: Oct 2006  |  IP: Logged
Legless-Marine
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 13423

posted 07 February 2007 11:31 PM      Profile for Legless-Marine        Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Coyote:

Please, don't try to cut down discussion of what is a very important element in the liberation of Palestine: the leadership of the Palestinian people.

I have no qualms whatsoever cutting it down - Call it an exercise in "Speaking truth to impotence".

At what point does incessant discussion translate into hope or improved quality of life for Palestinians?


From: Calgary | Registered: Oct 2006  |  IP: Logged
Ken Burch
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 8346

posted 08 February 2007 01:08 AM      Profile for Ken Burch     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
I'm glad to see this new group's emergence. There is little that is harder than being a Jewish critic of Israeli policy, so all those who put this organization together deserve our support.

And as to Legless-Marine's comments...

Well, maybe this should have been done earlier, but at least it IS being done. What's the point of denouncing these people?

Also, some of the signatories, such as the songwriter Leon Rosselson, have been active on this issue for many years. Don't assume that this was the first time any of them have said anything about the Israel/Palestine issue.


From: A seedy truckstop on the Information Superhighway | Registered: Feb 2005  |  IP: Logged
unionist
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 11323

posted 08 February 2007 04:47 AM      Profile for unionist     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Cueball:
I am not going to sit over here and dictate to Palestinians the terms upon which I will accept their leadership,

Don't invent or exaggerate please, Cueball. No one said anything about whether or not we "accept" their leadership. Of course we accept whatever leadership they themselves choose. But as lifelong allies of the struggle, surely we have the right to wish them success - instead of ongoing humiliation and failure?


From: Vote QS! | Registered: Dec 2005  |  IP: Logged
unionist
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 11323

posted 08 February 2007 04:54 AM      Profile for unionist     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Ken Burch:

Don't assume that this was the first time any of them have said anything about the Israel/Palestine issue.

I'm sure there are others too. I don't know Gillian Slovo, but her parents were among the most prominent white South African fighters against apartheid for decades. Anyway, this is a marvellous initiative, and to lambaste it because it doesn't provide "practical" support (which I gather means raising money or sending volunteers) betrays a weak understanding of how international solidarity works. Like charity, it begins at home. To embarrass and influence our own governments in the proper direction is the greatest support we can lend to the cause of Palestinian freedom and justice.

ETA: The enemies of the Palestinian people have certainly understood that lesson, haven't they!?

[ 08 February 2007: Message edited by: unionist ]


From: Vote QS! | Registered: Dec 2005  |  IP: Logged
Frustrated Mess
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 8312

posted 08 February 2007 05:10 AM      Profile for Frustrated Mess   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
quote:
People around the world, from South Africa to Viet Nam to "Rhodesia" to Iran to Kenya to China to East Timor to Cuba were subjugated, oppressed, treated as sub-human, surrounded, deported - they all produced leaders and organizations which were able, at least for a time, to unite the people and overthrow the oppressors.

All of the above were nationalist struggles within states. The Palestinian people are stateless and at the mercy of an oppressor who will kill men, women, and children, in collective punishments without a hint of guilt. If there is a parallel, it is the native North Americans who were forced from their lands into ever shrinking reserves and who where also met with merciless violence whenever they resisted. I suppose you have a judgement for their leadership also?

Such statements in my view are chauvinistic. I am sorry if that upsets you, but I can't think of another reason to blame Palestinians for not having that which they are methodically denied.

[ 08 February 2007: Message edited by: Frustrated Mess ]


From: doom without the gloom | Registered: Feb 2005  |  IP: Logged
unionist
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 11323

posted 08 February 2007 05:29 AM      Profile for unionist     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Frustrated Mess:

All of the above were nationalist struggles within states.

I will leave the refutation of that statement as an exercise for the reader!

quote:
Such statements in my view are chauvinistic. I am sorry if that upsets you, but I can't think of another reason to blame Palestinians for not having that which they are methodically denied.

You may not like it, but I'll repeat it differently:

Unless, and until, the Palestinian people throw aside their weak and/or corrupt and/or religious fanatical and/or warlord "leaders"; unless, and until, they lift themselves up, overcome their internal differences, and unite in one sustained struggle against the aggressor; they will remain enslaved.

I'm not "blaming" them for anything, no matter how often you choose to repeat that statement. I am pointing out that no one, no one, will liberate Palestine except the Palestinian people themselves, and that will never happen until they are able to follow the example of all the other peoples I named in the post that you didn't like.

If, because of the extreme severity of the dislocation and disenfranchisement and apartheid and military occupation which they suffer under, they are not able to build the kind of unity and leadership that will lead their struggle, then we will all feel sorry for them - but they will never win. Agree with that? Or are we afraid to talk straight?

You consider that chauvinist? Suit yourself. Our job, in Canada, is not to advise the Palestinians - I just made an innocent and (I think) frigging obvious statement about the tragedy of their struggle on babble - it is to mount the same kind of popular political movement which helped the people of South Africa achieve majority rule. That is the greatest contribution we can make.

Meanwhile, we must continue to condemn Harper and his ilk for withholding funds from the Palestinian Authority and all their other crimes in support of U.S.-Israeli aggression. But we don't need to maintain illusions about how well the Palestinians are doing...


From: Vote QS! | Registered: Dec 2005  |  IP: Logged
Frustrated Mess
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 8312

posted 08 February 2007 05:49 AM      Profile for Frustrated Mess   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
I don't recall anyone accusing the ANC of weak leadership when the de facto leadership was Winnie Mandella and many South Africans faced necklacing. Rather, Canadians, and others around the world, joined chapters of the ANC and pushed for boycotts. Maybe the issue isn't Palestinian leadership. Maybe that is just a poor excuse of blamimg the victim for not being a better victim. Maybe it is our leadership, cowed and afraid of being labelled anti-semites, and unwilling to take the type of stands that led the fall of SA Apartheid.

P.S. I managed to say all that without one exclamation mark! Oh, sorry.

[ 08 February 2007: Message edited by: Frustrated Mess ]


From: doom without the gloom | Registered: Feb 2005  |  IP: Logged
unionist
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 11323

posted 08 February 2007 06:52 AM      Profile for unionist     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Frustrated Mess:
Maybe it is our leadership, cowed and afraid of being labelled anti-semites, and unwilling to take the type of stands that led the fall of SA Apartheid.

I agree. That's why I'm excited by the initiative of the British Jews and wish for the same here. It makes it so much harder for the apologists for Israel to scream "anti-Semite!" when they have to scream it at growing numbers of Jews who are tired of the blackmail.


From: Vote QS! | Registered: Dec 2005  |  IP: Logged
Frustrated Mess
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 8312

posted 08 February 2007 09:16 AM      Profile for Frustrated Mess   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
I think it is exciting too. I am somewhat disappointed, however, by the inherently racist language employed by Harper here. Few seem to have noticed that he has reduced the lives, aspirations, dreams, and purpose of all Arab lives to "terrorists" to be rooted out and killed. Our own Prime Minister has become a standard bearer for the New Racism.
From: doom without the gloom | Registered: Feb 2005  |  IP: Logged
edgewaters72
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 11649

posted 08 February 2007 09:41 AM      Profile for edgewaters72     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Legless-Marine:

At what point does incessant discussion translate into hope or improved quality of life for Palestinians?

It translates into hope the moment consent and support for Israel's policies becomes electorally unpopular in places like Britain or Canada.

Israel and its supporters wouldn't invest untold billions into obtaining and maintaining that consent, if it wasn't crucial to maintenance of their policies.


From: Kingston Ontario | Registered: Jan 2006  |  IP: Logged
B.L. Zeebub LLD
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 6914

posted 08 February 2007 09:48 AM      Profile for B.L. Zeebub LLD     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
Note the Euston Manifesto applies international law to the Palestinians (who incidentally are not a signatory to any of the conventions and/or treaties which make up black-letter international law) and yet fails to point out Israel's failure to comply with international law to which it is a signatory, including the Fourth Geneva Convention for starters. The definition of "terror" as something that can only be applied to Palestinian actions is far from politically neutral as it simply ignores the overwhelming evidence that Israel both deliberately targets civilians and civilian areas AND is crassly negligent toward civilians when it is not directly targetting them. Combine this with no mention of the regular use of torture against Palestinians and it seems the Euston Manifesto fails to acknowledge the behaviour of Israel for what it is.

Apparently the Euston signatories feel that racism is also a one-way street. We are treated to a long diatribe on the specious "anti-Zionism = anti-Semitism" connection, and yet no mention of the real and structural "anti-Palestinianism" in the arguments of many Zionists (left and right). We are encouraged to look to the right for partners in creating a peaceful settlement and yet the topic of the antisemitism AND anti-Muslim sentiment rife on the right (both moderate and radical) in North America is never mentioned. What the Euston Manifesto has done is to take the hypocritical and blinkered platforms of the Israeli Labor party and writ them large in an North American context. Thye want a settlement, but for their own self-serving purposes rather than out of genuine concern for universal values. They're tired of fighting, but won't touch the subject of their own culpability. Labor's attendant inability to objectively catagorise Israel's conduct and policies is apparent as is the ethnocentric concern with attacks on Jewish people specifically rather than a position against racism generally AND specifically as it effects both Israelis and Palestinians, Jews and Arabs/Muslims. The Euston Manifesto is far from revolutionary or progressive, but rather a part of the familiar flux between Labor and Likud (or Likud-lite Kadima) that has resulted in next to no progress on the issue of settlements, a Palestinian state, Israeli state terror, etc.

Aside - seeing Walzer's name adorning that blinkered piece of rubbish is no surprise. He's long felt that the story of Israel must be read as an Exodus-like liberation of the Jewish people while failing to count the human cost absorbed by the Palestinians (as with the Canaanites in the original fable). Fittingly, he signs this Euston Manifesto which perpetuates the myth of the blameless Hebrews merely smiting a few pesky terrorist Canannites with the permission of the great Yahweh himself. Of course, our post-modern world is a little less grand and we've done away with most of the Biblical character drama (David, Goliath, etc.) so that the Euston Manifesto suffices with whipping the Palestinians with the rod of "International Law" and the rhetoric of terrorism (while throwing some "antisemitic" monkey-dirt at the left generally) while remaining silent about Israel's generally crappy behaviour toward the Palestinians.

[ 08 February 2007: Message edited by: B.L. Zeebub LLD ]


From: A Devil of an Advocate | Registered: Sep 2004  |  IP: Logged
unionist
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 11323

posted 08 February 2007 10:21 AM      Profile for unionist     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by edgewaters72:

It translates into hope the moment consent and support for Israel's policies becomes electorally unpopular in places like Britain or Canada.

Israel and its supporters wouldn't invest untold billions into obtaining and maintaining that consent, if it wasn't crucial to maintenance of their policies.


Well said. Why can't I be concise like that?


From: Vote QS! | Registered: Dec 2005  |  IP: Logged

All times are Pacific Time  

Post New Topic  Post A Reply Close Topic    Move Topic    Delete Topic next oldest topic   next newest topic
Hop To:

Contact Us | rabble.ca | Policy Statement

Copyright 2001-2008 rabble.ca