The Guardian has for once done a very good job of outlining the stark gap between the truth, and Israel’s “report” into the killing of four young children playing by the beach. It may be argued that this terrible tragedy is itself pretty irrelevant given that the Israelis killed 700 other children in Gaza that year. But the maintenance of this ludicrous, macabre and yes, evil, propaganda is fundamental to the self-image of many Israelis. They still contrive to see themselves as the good guys, under constant threat – despite the fact that Israel kills well more than a hundred for every Israeli killed.
This denial of the truth and claim of victimhood extends to the accusation of anti-Semitism trumpeted at every critic, including this one, despite the fact that I have the highest respect for the immense cultural and scientific achievements of the Jewish people. Israel is a different question entirely.
It is this absolute divorce of propaganda from reality that makes Tony Blair an ideal figurehead. Blair has now become head of a Council of Europe (loosely) linked body which claims to exist to promote tolerance, but in fact exists entirely to promote extreme Islamophobia and to shut down criticism of Israel. And it is a further sign of the estrangement from reality of the influential Israelis behind Blair’s appointment that they believe Tony Blair will influence public opinion positively in their favour. A remarkable example of confirmation bias.
Finally, I would merely note that it is not as insignificant as it may appear in terms of extreme corporatist bias, that the software auto-completes anti-Semitism for me (complete with capital letter), while it underlines Islamophobia as a non-existent word.
Geneticists disagree on whether genetics supports the view that European Jews are of Semitic ancestry. Here’s one (Israeli) expert who does not think it does: ‘Jews a Race’ Genetic Theory Comes Under Fierce Attack by DNA Expert:
Weekend Edition June 12-14, 2015
The Price of Denial
Israel’s Increasing Isolation
by ROBERT FANTINA
‘The bad news for Israel seems to continue almost unabated. Oh, here and there one finds a hard-fought victory, most recently in Palestine’s shameful withdrawal of its demand that FIFA (Fédération Internationale de Football Association; International Federation of Association Football) vote on expelling Israel for its various crimes against Palestinian soccer, and the decision of United Nations Secretary-General Ban Ki-Moon to omit the Israeli terrorist organization known as the IDF (Israel Defense Forces) from the U.N. list of violators of children’s rights. The former action was accomplished with furious efforts by Israel; the latter, with the usual complicity of the United States. But the bad news outweighs the good, and these small victories may be short-lived. After all, Mahmoud Abbas won’t be the puppet-head of the Palestinian Authority forever, and U.S. influence, at least in terms of support for Israel, seems to be on the wane.
When Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu stated unequivocally during his recent re-election campaign that there would never be an independent Palestine while he was Prime Minister, there was as subtle shift in the international chess game. This caused even President Barack Obama, the somewhat obstreperous pet of Mr. Netanyahu, but the pet nonetheless, to express more displeasure with Israel than any sitting president in history.’
[..]
‘The news has become so bad for Israel that even Mr. Netanyahu is unwittingly extolling the success of the BDS (Boycott, Divest and Sanction) movement, by publicly criticizing it. And in the U.S., which, of course, finances all of Israel’s crimes, a small group of wealthy U.S. Zionists, led by Sheldon Adelson, recently met in Las Vegas, to discuss how to combat BDS. It is reported that $50 million dollars was committed for this purpose.
Will this help? Will vast amounts of money really turn the tide from condemnation of Israel to acceptance? Mr. Netanyahu might be excused for thinking so. In a recent article in Ha’aretz, Gideon Levy wrote this about Israel’s denial of reality:
“It’s only to be expected when facing a worldwide campaign aimed at implementing justice and international law: the stage of denial, of repression and clinging to the false, nearly magical belief that if Israel will just explain its position better and invest the appropriate resources, everything will be fine. In other words, Israel continues to think that the world is dumb (and Israel is smart). That you can sell the world anything, just as you can sell anything to Israelis. That Adelson will buy the world’s sympathy the way he buys politicians in America….”’
/..
http://www.counterpunch.org/2015/06/12/israels-increasing-isolation/
Since the experts disagree, and I am no expert on genetics, I will only say that their disagreement probably results from it being unclear what genetic methods should be used to answer the question. In a matter that is of such obvious political consequence, people can easily be biased one way or the other.
Boo f*cking hoo the poor old Jews always getting it in the neck, oh please give me a break.
What about the indigenous people of North America slaughtered in there millions,or the indigenous people of NZ or Australia,or the tens of millions of black slaves stolen from Africa,and worked to death in North and South America.
I don’t sed many folk on here standing up for them.
Anyway to the point,Zionism was the creation,of largely athiest Jews foremost among them was Theodore Herzel.
Herzel’s theory was that Jews were not a religious group,but a nation. He and many others argued that anti-Semitism was endemic in Europe,and thus assimilation was not possible.
The Jews therefore decided to remove themselves from Europe,and to found a nation state of their own elsewhere.
Ironically this made Zionism the other side of the coin to anti-semitism,both believed the Jews should get out of town so to speak.
Lysias
12/06/2015 9:15pm
“So, if Wikipedia says something citing an earlier source for what it says, it’s better to cite that earlier source.”
Only, obviously, if you have personal access to that earlier source. It would be a horrendous academic sin to cite an earlier source which you have not examined yourself but only come across in a secondary source.
Kind regards,
John
That was what the whole Finkelstein-Dershowitz dispute was about. J
The genetic stuff is pretty much open to interpretation in any way anyone wants to interpret it. Identity is a cultural, political, historical construct – I’m not saying it’s not important, of course it is, hugely so – but it ought not to be conflated with genetics.
***************
Mary, the USA will never change its policy wrt Israel. Israel’s position is strengthening, not weakening.
Here’s Ba’al’s post where he is accused of having concealed his getting his information from Wikipedia:
He nowhere says that he got his information from Nasreddine Dinet. He apparently got the information that that author was the first to use the word Islamophobie in 1918, as that is said in the Wikipedia entry for Islamophobia, but I do not see that he was under any obligation to state that fact. He was obviously not concealing his use of Wikipedia. I do not see any misrepresentation in this post.
I meant Ba’al apparently got his information about the first use of the word from Wikipedia.
” Israel’s position is strengthening, not weakening.”
I would be interested in the basis for this. The outward appearances seem to contradict.
Palestinian children killed by the IDF in 2014: 541* –
http://www.ifamericansknew.org/stat/children.html
British soldiers killed in Afghanistan from 2001-2014, total – 453**
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/British_Forces_casualties_in_Afghanistan_since_2001
*Poorly documented, probably an underestimate, see text
** Meticulously documented.
It’s ok. Lysias, but thanks. What the well-known troll is trying to do is divert the discussion from Israel’s activities. We’re mostly used to the badly-aimed flak.
One of the many sad consequences of the far-left’s alliance with Islam is the prevalence of anti-Semitic conspiracy theories which, though it is not often realised, largely come from the Muslim world. For any of you who have spent any considerable time in Muslim countries, the prevelance of all sorts of theories about the Jews, many of which incidentally have their origins in the European far-right, is quite alarming. Certainly I first heard about 9/11 being the work of the Jews/Israelis in Pakistan, quite some time before I heard it here. The far-left, keen to ally itself with just about anything opposed to the West, has of course lapped up all this garbage with the aid of the internet.
Please all do our best to change apartheid Israel. Boycott sanctions and divestment will work.
I remember South Africa so well.
http://www.boycottisraelnetwork.net/
Does anyone remember ‘I’ve never met a nice South African’
Of course many option were considered for new state of Israel,in countries such as Uganda,Argentina and Madagascar.
Imagine how lucky those countries must now feel that the new Israel didn’t come to them,the citizens of those countries must gaze upon Palestine,and think,Phew we dodged the bullet.
It comes as no surprise that Britain had a hand in the creation of Israel and thus the carnage that followed it. When Balfour on behalf of the British nation of people,promised Palestine a second nation of people to the Zionist/Jews a third nation of people,in his 1917 Declaration.
@Macky
The Serbs are known to have been capable of atrocities like Nazis, having their own concentration camps, e.g. Rezak Hukanovic’s “The tenth circle of hell”. The Israelis in Khan Younis seem to me to have been fighting people they believed to be adults. Any deliberate killing of children would be a crime from the Israeli point of view, if my understanding is correct.
@Doug Scorgie
Israeli society contains its crackpots and IMO Ayelet Shaked and Oren Shachor do not speak for Israel any more than Meir Kahane or Baruch Goldstein. Daniel Barenboim and the late Aba Eban IMO would speak more authentically.
If Israel had been established in Uganda, white rule might have continued in Kenya, Rhodesia, South Africa, and the Portuguese colonies. Israeli support for white settler rule in those places might have made all the difference, militarily.
Only in America ! The southern zio evangelicals have already started taking deposits on tours to Lod near Tel Aviv next year touted by both Morris Cerullo and John Hagee. In anticipation of the prophesied showdown in the Old City between a returned Jesus Christ and the Anti-Christ, presumably bibi will have grown into the role by then! But that leaves little time for a takeover of al-Aqsa and building of a Jewish Temple there?
Boycott sanctions and divestment will work.
Absolutely. As can be seen from the fact they acknowledge their impact.
Netanyahu, recently:
https://www.middleeastmonitor.com/news/middle-east/18964-israeli-pm-netanyahu-lashes-out-at-growing-bds-campaign
BDS is of course here portrayed as a ‘Palestinian-led’ threat to Israel’s very existence, like anything else remotely opposed to Israeli ethnic cleansing. Yeah, sure.
The Serbs were themselves the victims of genocide in World War Two. Some 350,000 Serbs, military and civilian, were killed in that war. Many of them were killed by the Ustaše collaborationist government in Croatia, including in the concentration camps of Jasenovac, Stara Gradiška, Sisak, Jastrebarsko, and Jadovno.
Anon1
“the far-left’s alliance with Islam ”
Would that be David Cameron or John Cain’s version of far left politics, please?
McCain
Lysias
12/06/2015 9:41pm
Sure, looks fine to me. No source in fact cited, there is nothing wrong with that.
I do not trust Wikipedia for anything. If I come across stuff in Wikipedia, I try very hard to check it with at least two other independent sources.
Kind regards,
John
Abe Rene; “The Israelis in Khan Younis seem to me to have been fighting people they believed to be adults.”
That’s the most ludicrous example of Head in the Sand Denial I’ve seen for a while, but don’t worry, you had no credibilty to lose with me anyway.
Abe Rene;; “The Serbs are known to have been capable of atrocities like Nazis”
Would that be the Serbs who heroically resisted the Nazis, and suffered such heinous barbarity from the Croatian collaborators, that even the Nazis were embarrassed ?;
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Usta%C5%A1e
But in this case Wikipedia in two footnotes cites sources for its assertion about the first use of “Islamophobia” (in its French form). So it is very likely correct here (about the fact that the word was used in 1918 — it’s virtually impossible to prove a negative like the assertion that the word was not used before then).
Aidworker1
12/06/2015 9:57pm
I sure do. Spitting Image.
A shame, because I’ve met several.
Do you remember Charles Dance in “The Professionals”?
Kind regards,
John
Lysias
12/06/2015 10:39pm
Sure, agreed. Interesting that these two footnotes are themselves secondary sources!
J
The Price of Denial;
http://www.counterpunch.org/2015/06/12/israels-increasing-isolation/
Ben, at 9:50pm.
Look at the situation wrt the Palestinians – being squeezed out of even the small amount of territory they had left, being hopelessly divided, being seen as instruments by regional powers. Then look at the Arab states in the region – either lackey states totally uninterested in Palestinian freedom, or else destroyed and busy killing… Arabs. Iran, under siege.
Israel is a’First World’ state with a nuclear arsenal and massive conventional weaponry as well as an extremely strong and deep sense of existential national unity. Since the early C20th, they consistently have been supported by all four major world powers – the UK, France, the USSR and the USA.
Nothing Israel does ever provokes real sanction from their sponsor; that is because, while the interests of the Israel and the USA do not always coincide tactically, they do coincide strategically. Israel and Saudi Arabia are the two main US regional bulwarks. Egypt used to be the third, maybe still is.
Believe me, I wish I were wrong. Looking coldly at the situation, in my opinion there is close to zero chance of there being a Palestinian state. The Palestinians have lost. They have no more chance of survival as a national/territorial entity than did the Incas. That is not to say that one should stop supporting their cause. But the realistic analysis is this, I think.
Suhayl, Israel can survive only as long as the U.S. is able and willing to support it. The U.S. is a power in decline, whose economy could collapse at any moment.
That’s able. Then there’s willing. The realities of the Middle East are now such that the U.S. has more interests in common with Iran than with Israel. If we here in the U.S. ever have a president with the intelligence of Nixon or JFK, a reversal of alliances could take place very quickly. A revolution in Saudi Arabia — always a possibility — would remove one of the most important factors militating against a rapprochement with Iran.