Letters posted here are associated with the following article:

989
Letters
Sunday, January 4, 2009 12:00 AM

Orwell, blinding tribalism, selective Terrorism, and Israel/Gaza

Extreme emotional and cultural identification with one side leads people to believe that X is good when done by them and evil when done to them.

The letters thread is now closed.

View:
Sunday, January 4, 2009 06:15 PM

Why did Israeli government forces help launch Hamas?

If the Israeli militarists are truly opposed to radical Islamic terrorists, why would they undermine existing secular Palestinian organizations in order to help create the fundamentalist Hamas?

Sunday, January 4, 2009 06:17 PM

Just a reminder about the UN...

After coming late to the game, I found a couple references here about the the "birth" of Israel and the UN. Just so this propaganda point can be laid to rest (again), the UN at no time gave the up-n-coming State of Israel any land. There was a recommendation made for a partition plan, which Israel agreed to, but the Arabs states did not, so it was never enacted anyway.

BTW--to the Israel Apologists: Is this all you've got?

I've never seen such fluff-filled and fact-free arguments in my life. If this is the best you can do, we should have no trouble turning the tide of public opinion.

Stop embarrassing yourselves.

Sunday, January 4, 2009 06:18 PM

Saleem

I'd be interested in knowing what concrete steps you think should be taken (by Israel, by Obama, by the Palestinians) to resolve this seemingly never-ending conflict with a lasting peace.

I don't like speaking for others, and probably shouldn't speak for Glenn, but from reading his articles and seeing who he associates himself with, my best guess is that he supports ending the establishment's pro-war position of arming and subsidizing every Stalwart Ally, from democracy to tin pot dictatorship, not in small part because of the civil rights abuses that end up happening domestically due to the secrecy that is bred in America's Imperial Militarism.

Don't quote me on that though, it's just a guess! I'm probably wrongfully projecting.

Sunday, January 4, 2009 06:19 PM

WinSmith

[Introductory line deleted by the author.]

Hannah Arendt also signed her name to this.

TO THE EDITORS OF THE NEW YORK TIMES:
Among the most disturbing political phenomena of our times is the emergence in the newly created state of Israel of the "Freedom Party" (Tnuat Haherut), a political party closely akin in its organization, methods, political philosophy and social appeal to the Nazi and Fascist parties. It was formed out of the membership and following of the former Irgun Zvai Leumi, a terrorist, right-wing, chauvinist organization in Palestine. ...

http://www.physics.harvard.edu/~wilson/NYTimes1948.html

Sunday, January 4, 2009 06:20 PM

@Glenn, derbig

I'm sorry, are you guys both saying I'm a liar about omooex? There are multiple instances from yesterday, I'll put a permalink to the first one at my signature.

Sunday, January 4, 2009 06:22 PM

Excellent Post, Glenn!

You've brilliantly summarized the mindset of the rabid zionist zealot: tribal loyalties are their number one priority. But for issues that don't involve their own tribe, they conveniently revert to left-leaning humanists.

But, that contradiction within their principle set is so clear - so blatant - to the non-Zionist, it is comical to those of us who advocate for human rights to hear them try and rhetorically defend ethnic cleansing, land theft, collective punishment, the apartheid reality in the occupied territories, etc.

Doesn't matter if it's WinSmith, the Satanists in Hollywood guy, Abe Foxman, Alan Dershowitz, or any of the other zionist propagandists, every post they write is just another regurgitation of an anti-semitic charge. Sometimes its blatant, but more often than not it's implied. It's often subtle, but it's there.

When Jimmy Carter, the one who commissioned the building the Holocaust Museum in DC using US taxpayer money and who has devoted his life to Israeli peace, writes a book depicting his opinions on what is going on there - Abe Foxman, Dershowitz, and rabid zionists all demonize Carter as an anti-Semite.

When Amnesty International reports Israeli crimes against humanity in the occupied territories Abe Foxman calls the organization Anti-semitic.

Zionists have cloaked themselves under Judaism so that they may use this "anti-semitic" charge to deflect their crimes against humanity. That's ALL they have that separates their goals from that of Slobodan Milosevic - their Jewishness, and thus the Holocaust imagery comes in quite handy.

The Zionist ideology is based on the canard that all non-Jews are anti-semites, and therefore Israel MUST have its own Jewish state with a Jewish majority. Fear is what lead to the creation of Israel, and fear is the best marketing tool it has going for itself.

We should see if we can count and document every charge of anti-semitism (whether blatant or implied) as part of their rhetorical tactic to win their unwinable position.

Sunday, January 4, 2009 06:27 PM

@El Cid

Why did Israeli government forces help launch Hamas?

Much the same as why the CIA helped start al-Qaeda, I guess: it must have seemed like a good idea at the time.

Sunday, January 4, 2009 06:28 PM

NOT rhetorical

Is this a WAR CRIME?

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/world/middle_east/article5447590.ece

or click sig

Sunday, January 4, 2009 06:28 PM

@ The Call Up

Wow, I knew they controlled Hollywood, the banks and the media, but Jews also invented anti-Semitism itself? It's all part of their brilliant methods of covert control -- make the world think that millions of people hate Jews, then abuse that guilt and sympathy to gain global power.

Amazing!!

Hey, wake me when you get to the part where Jews fight Superman.

Sunday, January 4, 2009 06:31 PM

The Call Up

You've brilliantly summarized the mindset of the rabid zionist zealot: tribal loyalties are their number one priority.

Actually, I made rather clear -- repeatedly -- that I wasn't describing a mindset unique to any one group, but rather, to groups generally, including "those who defend American actions in every case, or who find justification in attacks on Israeli civilians, or who find simplistic moral clarity in a whole range of other complex and protracted disputes where all sides share infinite blame."

The fact that you decided to read that as applying to only one group, one for which you bear a clear antipathy, may itself be an example of what I was describing.

Sunday, January 4, 2009 06:32 PM

@- maureenodonnel

I'm sorry for snapping at you. . .

Apology accepted. You, as an Irish national, are likely unfamiliar with how weird and vehement my Irish-American family -- going back generations -- was in romanticizing the IRA and Sein Fein. We were an ocean apart, but still tied to The Cause.

It pretty much ended w/ my generation (I'm 52), but is what I was raised with. And still, today, I would recuse myself from deciding any issue of acrimony between green and orange Irish. My amygdala is trained to always favor the green.

Most Active Letters Threads

740

The commendably missing element from Obama's speech

There was no pretense that human rights is our goal, or the likely outcome, in escalating the war
688

Obama's exceedingly familiar justifications for escalation

The "new" approach to Afghanistan touted by White House officials seems quite old
370

America's regression

It's almost impossible to find a nation with as many torture advocates as the U.S. has.
329

Yes, it's Obama's war now

An uninspiring speech sells a dubious policy, but progressives who feel betrayed have only themselves to blame
322

Do Obama officials know what his Afghanistan plan is?

What explains the completely contradictory statements from key aides on a central plank of the war strategy?

View all »

Letters Help

Currently in Salon