In a comment on the blog Victim's Voice, run by Stephen Flatlow, a commentor calling herself Shana Maydel has accused me of anti-semitism. My post, which criticized the activities of organizations such as the ADL and AIPAC for being uncritically supportive of Israel. To Maydel, this comment was apparently tantamount to alleging that Jews control the government and the media, something which I do not believe.
My Gut Reaction: Shana Maydel (whomever she may be) is a childish coward.
Analysis: Maydel's rather incoherent rant raises several issues. First, her unsubstantiated use of the term anti-semite cheapens the meaning of the term, effectively reducing it to a code word for anyone who disagrees with her in regard to the state of Israel. This dilutes the actual impact of the term, and makes it less likely that actual incidents of anti-semitism will be taken seriously in the future. (Essentially the boy who cried wolf effect.)
Second, Maydel hurls smears at the organization my comment originally defended CAIR, effectively calling it a front for Hamas. However, these charges have been debunked by Michael Rolince, a former FBI agent and counter terrorism expert who concludes there are no hard facts backing the accusations. (Hmmm...perhaps Ms. Maydel's next act should be to expose the FBI as an anti-semetic front group.)
Showing posts with label Stephen M. Flatow. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Stephen M. Flatow. Show all posts
Tuesday, September 22, 2009
Monday, September 21, 2009
Here We Go Again...
The usual one man gang of panic-mongers is at it again. Stephen Flatlow of the Victim's Voice Blog is in his usual state of borderline paranoia at the recent set of terror arrests. He is so worked up that he takes issue with anyone raising questions about what is happening, including a few snipes at the Muslim advocacy group CAIR (Council for American Islamic Relations) for pointing at that this was another group of bumbling idiots who had to be entrapped into doing something. He argues that they will defend anyone just because they are Muslim.
My Gut Reaction: Pot. Kettle. Black. (With apologies to Richard Dawkins.)
Analysis: Although Flatlow attempts to contrast the Muslim advocacy groups with Jewish advocacy groups, it would seem that many of these Jewish advocacy groups are guilty of the very things he accuses CAIR of. Anyone who follows Middle Eastern news regularly cannot help but be aware of the uncritical support given to Israel given by American Jewish advocacy groups such as AIPAC and the Anti-Defamation League. Leaders of these groups such as Abraham Foxman justify virtually any Israeli action, without reflection on its brutality, largely on the basis of shared religion.
My Gut Reaction: Pot. Kettle. Black. (With apologies to Richard Dawkins.)
Analysis: Although Flatlow attempts to contrast the Muslim advocacy groups with Jewish advocacy groups, it would seem that many of these Jewish advocacy groups are guilty of the very things he accuses CAIR of. Anyone who follows Middle Eastern news regularly cannot help but be aware of the uncritical support given to Israel given by American Jewish advocacy groups such as AIPAC and the Anti-Defamation League. Leaders of these groups such as Abraham Foxman justify virtually any Israeli action, without reflection on its brutality, largely on the basis of shared religion.
Wednesday, July 08, 2009
Viewing the World Through a Tinted Lens
Over the past week, I have been commenting on a blog called The Victim's Voice. The blog, maintained by Mr. Stephen M. Flatlow, who lost his daughter in a terrorist attack, is largely an apologia for Israel. The majority of the posts, at least that I've seen, focus on defending Israel against accusations of imperialism and racism.
Unfortunately, this defense at times translates into opposition to any sympathy for the Palestinian cause, no matter how measured. For example, the post which provoked my ire attacked a speech by UN Secretary General Ban Ki-Moon, who praised the courage of Palestinian refugees who've endured in spite of conflict.
Flatlow contends that rather than praising the refugees, Ki-Moon should be attacking Muslim countries for not integrating the refugees into their own populations. Never mind the fact that the Palestinians as a whole seem to want to return to their original homes.
Flatlow's response to this point is that the Palestinians voluntarily left in order to allow Arab armies to attack Israel. Even if one ignores the general dictates of prudence, which suggest that one should flee an area if a military force is approaching, this ignores the evidence presented by Ilan Pappe, a Jewish Israeli historian, has uncovered evidence that Zionist leaders planned to expel Palestinians before the war started. One commenter on the blog, Shana Maydel (apparently a pseudonym, as shana maydel is a Yiddish phrase for "pretty girl") attempted to discredit Pappe as a bad historian, incidentally throwing in that he is a "Communist" and "anti-Zionist." Though if he was such a bad historian, one wonders why they felt the need to drive him out of the country.
Unfortunately, this defense at times translates into opposition to any sympathy for the Palestinian cause, no matter how measured. For example, the post which provoked my ire attacked a speech by UN Secretary General Ban Ki-Moon, who praised the courage of Palestinian refugees who've endured in spite of conflict.
Flatlow contends that rather than praising the refugees, Ki-Moon should be attacking Muslim countries for not integrating the refugees into their own populations. Never mind the fact that the Palestinians as a whole seem to want to return to their original homes.
Flatlow's response to this point is that the Palestinians voluntarily left in order to allow Arab armies to attack Israel. Even if one ignores the general dictates of prudence, which suggest that one should flee an area if a military force is approaching, this ignores the evidence presented by Ilan Pappe, a Jewish Israeli historian, has uncovered evidence that Zionist leaders planned to expel Palestinians before the war started. One commenter on the blog, Shana Maydel (apparently a pseudonym, as shana maydel is a Yiddish phrase for "pretty girl") attempted to discredit Pappe as a bad historian, incidentally throwing in that he is a "Communist" and "anti-Zionist." Though if he was such a bad historian, one wonders why they felt the need to drive him out of the country.
Wednesday, May 27, 2009
Why I Support the Palestinian Cause
A comment by another blogger, Stephen M. Flatow, has led me to examine why I support the Palestinian cause in the first place. Contrary to what Flatow seems to assume, opposition to Israeli policy does not necessarily imply anti-Semitism or opposition to Israel's existence. A deeper examination of my motivations will make this evident.
Perhaps the deepest roots of my support for the Palestinian cause lie in my ethnic heritage. My roots include the Irish, the Polish, and Native Americans. All three groups share one common trait: they have faced violent struggles to free their homelands from foreign domination. To a certain extent, I recognize the Palestinian struggle as analogous to those earlier struggles, a valid effort to assert dominance over one's homeland.
Some will no doubt comment that the Israelis are essentially doing the same thing: struggling for an ancestral homeland. However, I feel it is worth noting that while the Jewish people were largely absent from Palestine for centuries, whereas the Palestinians have been displaced more recently. They have a far greater claim to the land.
Another factor is my concern for human rights in all countries. Flatow comments that he wonders why Caryl Churchill, the author of Seven Jewish Children profiled in an earlier blog post, does not give attention to Sri Lanka, Darfur, or other human rights hot spots. As anyone familiar with my blog can attest, I have a strong concern for human rights, with a particular focus on China. Israeli actions that impact civilian populations naturally draw my attention, as part of my broader concerns.
Notice that none of this translates into anti-Semitism. Flatow claims that anti-Israeli activism derives largely from hatred of Jewish people, citing one instance where an anti-Israel protest in Fort Lauderdale in which there was a pro-Nazi chant. The use of an isolated incident to claim an entire movement is anti-Semitic is simply comical. Indeed, Flatow's treatment of Seven Jewish Children suggests that he looks for anti-Semitism in any expression of opposition to Israeli policy, a trait common to many, if not all, backers of the Israeli occupation.
Perhaps the deepest roots of my support for the Palestinian cause lie in my ethnic heritage. My roots include the Irish, the Polish, and Native Americans. All three groups share one common trait: they have faced violent struggles to free their homelands from foreign domination. To a certain extent, I recognize the Palestinian struggle as analogous to those earlier struggles, a valid effort to assert dominance over one's homeland.
Some will no doubt comment that the Israelis are essentially doing the same thing: struggling for an ancestral homeland. However, I feel it is worth noting that while the Jewish people were largely absent from Palestine for centuries, whereas the Palestinians have been displaced more recently. They have a far greater claim to the land.
Another factor is my concern for human rights in all countries. Flatow comments that he wonders why Caryl Churchill, the author of Seven Jewish Children profiled in an earlier blog post, does not give attention to Sri Lanka, Darfur, or other human rights hot spots. As anyone familiar with my blog can attest, I have a strong concern for human rights, with a particular focus on China. Israeli actions that impact civilian populations naturally draw my attention, as part of my broader concerns.
Notice that none of this translates into anti-Semitism. Flatow claims that anti-Israeli activism derives largely from hatred of Jewish people, citing one instance where an anti-Israel protest in Fort Lauderdale in which there was a pro-Nazi chant. The use of an isolated incident to claim an entire movement is anti-Semitic is simply comical. Indeed, Flatow's treatment of Seven Jewish Children suggests that he looks for anti-Semitism in any expression of opposition to Israeli policy, a trait common to many, if not all, backers of the Israeli occupation.
Tuesday, May 26, 2009
Yet Another Terror Plot That's Not All It's Cracked Up to Be
The Nation's Robert Dreyfuss reveals the alleged plot against synagogues in New York may not have been as great a threat as politicians and law enforcement officials are alleging. As his article demonstrates, the informant at the center of the plot was apparently an identity theft suspect recruited by the FBI to infiltrate potential terrorist groups.
However, the informant went beyond infiltrating to create his own terrorist cell, recruiting people to a plot conducted by himself. The actual threat posed by the suspects, one of whom is a schizophrenic, may well have been nill.
That has not stopped the panic-mongers from sounding the alarm bell. Stephen M. Flatow warns about the "cancer" of terrorism within our cities, never mind the fact that virtually all the terror plots discovered after 9 / 11, have been shown to be law enforcement fabrications.
However, the informant went beyond infiltrating to create his own terrorist cell, recruiting people to a plot conducted by himself. The actual threat posed by the suspects, one of whom is a schizophrenic, may well have been nill.
That has not stopped the panic-mongers from sounding the alarm bell. Stephen M. Flatow warns about the "cancer" of terrorism within our cities, never mind the fact that virtually all the terror plots discovered after 9 / 11, have been shown to be law enforcement fabrications.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
