A Response & Productive Suggestions Re: JPost.com: "New York Jews rally in support of Israel"

Dear Mr. Frishberg:

 

I can only view your decision to launch a baseless personal attack against me as a reflection of your character--the same character which refused to vote to officially condemn Zionism.

 

Still, I will try to move past the fact you could have easily check the link I provided to see the source of the title instead of personally attacking me.   I will also ignore your claim of "Israeli Defense," and not "Offense" forces.

 

Instead, perhaps we can take your "outrage" and channel it to something productive for all.  However, in doing so, it is necessary to determine how sincere you truly are in your attack when claiming to be "outright offended" only to learn the party responsible for the title was the Zionist press.

 

Did you write the Zionist Jerusalem Post and express your "outrage"?    If not, why not?

 

Will you now write the Jerusalem Post?  

 

One might believe your sincerity had you actually supported condemning the very ideology-Zionism-responsible for the Jerusalem Post's title.    But you did not find Zionism "outright offensive" when it came time to vote and nearly 40% of the NLG stood in genuine and full solidarity with Palestinians voting to officially condemn Zionism.    

Where did you stand?  

Did you stand with those virtually all white NLG members who utilized one single Arab as their "poster child" to hide behind their continuous and dedicated shielding of Zionism from being officially branded as racist, even though they admitted it is racism?  

Without shame, you now have the nerve to try condemn me for exposing a Zionist official's (Gillerman) offensive comments by posting an article with the exact title from the Jerusalem Post (a Zionist paper).   Yet, you could not muster the courage to condemn Zionism-the ideology/program responsible for the title.

Did you condemn those in the NLG who refused to condemn Zionism, despite admitting Zionism is a form of racism, because they insisted an official condemnation of Zionism meant condemning Judaism-thereby fusing the two and reinforcing the Zionist myth that Zionism is Judaism?  

Did this "outrage" you?

Remember, it was you, not me, who failed to condemn Zionism.  

And Zionism is precisely why so many newspapers and organizations "label" these people "Jews" instead of Zionists.   So if you cannot condemn Zionism itself, do not give cry when the Zionism does not suit your interests.   

I pleaded with you and others to condemn Zionism instead of merely the natural/necessary consequences of Zionism or "select Zionist policies," but you adamantly refused-you did not find Zionism "outright offensive."  

Suddenly, you are "outright offended" at reading headlines from the Zionist press (Jerusalem Post).   Why now? 

Again, such headlines directly flow from the same ideology/program, Zionism, which claims it is "redeeming" (an extremely racist term itself) Palestinian land on behalf of adherents to Judaism worldwide.   

Does this "outrage" you?

Indeed, the exact same Zionism whose product "Israel" carries out its genocide, racism, and colonial-occupation all under the banner of a "Jewish state" utilizing Jewish symbols on it F-16's (while dropping bombs on the homes of Arab women, men, and children), its tanks, flag, anthem, and currency along with its Zionist Chief Rabbis and Rabbinical Courts.  

Does this "outrage" you?

It is worth repeating, Zionism is precisely why so many newspapers and organizations claiming to be "Jewish" papers or organizations, label their activities "Jewish" rather than Zionist.   

Does this "outrage" you?  If not, why not?

Will you organize others to condemn any of the following listed below?

 

The Conference of Presidents of Major American Jewish Organizations, claiming to be "the voice of organized American JewryŠrepresenting 51 national Jewish organizations" which lobbied and organized several rallies in the name of "American Jewry," not Zionism, to support "Israel." Note, it was The Conference of President of Major American Jewish Organizations, not the Democratic party, which organized the rally with the offensive/barbaric comments of Gillerman. 

 

Arutz Sheva-Israel National News which wrote, "LA Jews United With Israel" stating "The Jews of LA are encouraging other cities throughout the world to host similar rallies in support of Israel during these trying times"  http://www.israelnationalnews.com/print.php3?what=news&id=21060  

 

Jewish Telegraphic Agency who wrote, "Jewish groups rally behind Israel as conflict with Hezbollah escalates" http://www.jta.org/page_view_story.asp?intarticleid=16819&intcategoryid=4

 

NewYorkBusiness.com which wrote, "Jewish groups to rally in support of Israel" http://www.newyorkbusiness.com/news.cms?id=14173

 

The Forward which considers itself to be "the voice of the American Jew and the conscience of the community" while writing: 

"Jewish group s have spent the past few days urging policymakers to make sure that Israel is given ample time and freedom of action to inflict as much damage as possible on Hezbollah's infrastructure in southern Lebanon.  About 50 leaders of the Jewish community from across the country were scheduled to meet Thursday with Bush administration officials and congressional leaders." http://www.forward.com/articles/8139  

The Jewish Week which stated, "A whopping 95 percent of the Jews surveyed said they approved of the government's actions with regard to Hezbollah." http://www.thejewishweek.com/news/newscontent.php3?artid=12746

Christian Science Monitor which wrote, "Many American Jews rally around Sharon: Though often liberal, they unite behind Israel and its hawkish leader in latest crisis"  http://www.csmonitor.com/2002/0401/p02s02-ussc.html 

Canadian Jewish News which wrote, "Canadian Jews rally for Israel" http://www.cjnews.com/pastissues/02/apr25-02/main.asp

 

Anti-Defamation League claiming to work on behalf of "the Jewish people" (a Zionist concept) which placed numerous ads in the press defending "Israel."   The ADL also lobbied outside the US and "Urge[d] European Leaders to Stand With Israel Against Hezbollah and Hamas"

 

Here, I one is reminded of the words of  Human Rights Activist and Holocaust Survivor Prof. Israel Shahak who in a similar context once noted:

 

"the Anti-Defamation League which follows the media to protest against what they consider a defamation of Judaism, it can be presumed that [the views above] are for the ADL not a defamation but a part of Judaism."

 

As such,  it would be most productive if you re-directed your "outrage" to Zionist press and other organizations that rally as adherents to Judaism, not Zionism.   Unlike other groups oppressed by racism, the US State Department, at the behest of Zionist organizations, has set-up special office titled the, "Office to Monitor and Combat Anti-Semitism" (defined exclusively to apply to Jews and criticism of Zionism ("Israel") only, not non-Jewish Arabs).

 

If your "outrage" is sincere, perhaps you will direct the US State Dept.'s "Office to Monitor and Combat Anti-Semitism" to address groups, like the ADL, The Conference of Presidents of Major American Jewish Organizations, and even so-called "liberal" groups like the Progressive Jewish Alliance along with others who conflate Zionism with Judaism.   

 

If you are truly "outraged" then organizing against those who conflate Zionism with Judaism would be the very least you can  and should do.

 

Thus, the real question becomes will you organize such an effort or continue to protect Zionism itself from condemnation? 

 

Will vote to condemn Zionism in the NLG in the future and take a clear stand against Zionism today ?   Or will you continue with the myth that Zionism and support for Palestinians and justice/peace is compatible and thus Zionism is not the problem, but rather only a few "select Zionist policies"?

 

Those who are not willing to condemn Zionism itself should not be surprised when people conflate Zionism with Judaism.  In the words of a Australian Jewish  Prof. Andrew Benjamin, University of Technology, Sydney: 

Each time Israel acts in a certain way, security measures around synagogues are doubled.

Why? The straightforward answer attests to the victory of those who have linked and continue to link being a Jew to Israel and thus to
those who conflate Judaism and Zionism.

The consequence of this is that a critique of Zionism or a disagreement over the policies of Israel are taken at best as a criticism of Jews and, at worst, as anti-Semitic.

If you are serious, I extend my hand in the hope we can work together to combat and officially condemn Zionism, which not only destroys its victims but also threatens those whose religion/name is used while Zionism carries out its colonial genocide, occupation, and racism.

 

Until Return,

Michael Shahin

--p.s. The days of shielding Zionism from being officially branded as "racist" under the banner of being pro-Palestinian are over-people can fool some of the people, some of the time, but they cannot fool all of the people all of the time.   Which explains why nearly 40% of the NLG voted to officially condemn Zionism.  Let history record that the explanations given, by those in the NLG who shielded Zionism from being officially being branded as "racist," make it abundantly clear their haunting failure to condemn the horrid ideology-Zionism-responsible for the on-going Nakba was not due to ignorance; those who refused to officially condemn Zionism they knew precisely what was happening.    Nor does any, at best half-hearted, condemnation of a few "select policies" of Zionism serve as a defense given those who stand to exonorate Zionism or shield it from being officially branded as "racist" clearly understand such horrific policies are necessary consequences of Zionism which are certain to continue so long as Zionism itself is preserved and never officially condemned.

 

 

On 7/21/06, Frishberga@aol.com <Frishberga@aol.com> wrote:

I have watched with disgust the news of Pro-Israel rallies while war crimes were being committed by the Israeli Defense Forces.  I didn't think it necessary to go on record in the NLG as being in support of the statement that has been issued by the National Office.

 That said, if the subject head I put in quotations from Michael Shaheen's e-mail posting is lifted from the Jerusalem Post, it is merely bad judgment.  If it is an original characterization of the rally held with Andy Cuomo and Hillary Clinton among the prominent Democrats endorsing the criminal invasion, the phrase "New York Jews" is outright offensive.

 I would hope we could avoid the ethnic stereotyping and bigotry of the right wing.

Aaron Frishberg