Comments on "Who Put Hate in My Sunday Paper?"

Religious Studies Professor Omid Safi of the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill posted Who Put Hate in My Sunday Paper? to the Harvard Pluralism Project.

 

Here are some comments.

 

On page 2 Safie writes:

Nonie Darwish, with the tell-all website: http://www.arabsforisrael.com/ "Arabs for Israel"? Darwish also neglects to mention that she is another ex-Muslim turned both Christian and ardent supporter of Israel. In a world when virtually all Arabs and most Muslims view the Palestinian/Israeli tragedy as the burning political and moral issue of our time, how many Arabs in the world can be claimed as being passionate supporters of Israel?

I read her book They Call Me Infidel: Why I Renounced Jihad for America, Israel, and the War on Terror. Her father was Mustafa Hafiz, the Egyptian intelligence commander for Gaza. He was murdered by the State of Israel in July 1956.

 

Here is an article describing Israel's failed and successful assassination attempts: http://electronicintifada.net/v2/article9646.shtml.

 

I have read other articles claiming Hafiz opposed sending fidaiyun from Gaza into Southern Israel even as he imposed military discipline on Palestinian resistance in Gaza.

 

I have asked Egyptians, who lived through that time period, whether the terminology of shahid was used for Egyptian military casualties, and they all rejected the idea. Egyptian public education seems to have been quite secular at that time period. The martyrdom education she claims to have received seems like a complete figment of the imagination.

 

The book uses Turkish terms like bayram for eid. (Eastern European Muslims whether Slavic or Tatar use the word, but I have never heard an Arab use it.)

 

Darwish is not a prolific writer and has a link to only one article that she has written on her website. The article was carried on the Huffington Post. It is fairly standard Zionist boilerplate and has a very familiar feel as does her book. I suspect Aydan Kodaloglu may have been involved in its publication because its phraseology has some similarities to the content of articles by her, but the ghostwriter may simply have plagiarized Kodaloglu, who might have just been repeating other Zionist literature as well. See Petroleum: Driving Force in Zionism.

 

When I tried to question Darwish at Boston College during a recent visit about some of the incongruities in her story and asked her why she believed Eastern Europeans had the right to steal Palestine from the native population, she ranted at me rather incoherently.

 

Also from p. 2:

Carline Glick, a member of Israel On Campus Coalition.

Caroline Glick is a managing editor at the Jerusalem Post. I don't believe individuals are members of ICC. I think I met her when she and I both lived in Chicago. I was friends with an ex-Lubavitcher gal named Rukhel, who once took me to an event sponsored by Aish haTorah (or Ohr Somayach -- I don't remember for sure, but it was Israel-oriented, and therefore Aish is more likely). I vaguely remember that Rukhel introduced me to a gal name Caroline, and I think she was Caroline Glick -- at least the gal I met looked a lot like Glick's picture at her website. Thus Caroline Glick may come to Zionism through Aish or one of the other Baalei Tshuva yeshivas.

Pipes talks about 10-15% extremist Muslims, but at times he gives the number of stealth Islamists at 80-85%. (See Saudia in the Gun Sights.)

From p. 3:

The Obsession DVD states that it is made by "Clarion Fund". What does the Clarion Fund stand for? And who exactly are they? Their intentions are made a bit clearer through the use of their registered website: www.radicalislam.org . What exactly does "radical Islam" constitute? Who stands for it, and who opposes it? We are not told, aside from this: "Radical Islam poses a significant threat to the Western way of life. The Islamists' ultimate aim is conversion and domination of the West, which they see as the root of all evil that must be eradicated." This type of labeling without defining is as unhelpful as accusations of "Communist" in the 1950's, or "unpatriotic" and "un-American" more recently. It is a catch-all, bogey man argument that is masquerading as analysis.

Jews often don't like it when Christians proselytize. I am not more than a little offended when Jewish groups try to impose their prejudices on the rest of us.

 

Also from p. 3:

Their founder, Rabbi Noah Weinberg has received recognition from the mayor of Jerusalem.

I have read that Weinberg is very ill. I met him in the 70s. The current behavior of the top management at  Aish haTorah seems unlike him, but people change, and Muslim-baiting seems to provide Aish haTorah staff with access to a lot of money.

 

Also from p. 3:

So does this Obsession DVD fall within the purview of Aish HaTorah's "outreach"? Given the intertwined nature of the political and the religious in Israel, it seems that Aish HaTorah has gone from evangelizing to Jews to waging a global propaganda campaign against Islam and Muslims, while also working hard to cover its tracks, as we shall see.

"Global propaganda campaign" could be described as milhemet mitzvah, which is Jewish jihad (war of commandment by religious law, authority or God). The rules are for the most part identical to those of jihad in the military sense.

 

Safie mentions Rebecca Kabat on p. 4:

 

Here is a picture of Rebecca Kabat:

 

 

I looked at her blog at Kabat's random thoughts. It seems quite vacuous, but in my experience college volunteers are often the most extreme Zionists.

 

From p. 4.

This points to the acknowledgement that the struggle over Palestine/Israel is going to be fought—rhetorically, one hopes—on college campuses. In fact, college campuses formed the primary site of the distribution of the Obsession DVD before the newspaper campaign. The primary audience on college campuses have been Jewish organizations (like Hillel) and College Republicans.

StandWithUs and the David Project are the other two major players in the college Israel Advocacy market.

 

From p. 5.

The spokesperson for the Clarion Fund, Gregory Ross, did not deny that this article had appeared on their site, he was only upset that they had been caught with it! The Clarion Fund has been established as a 501(c)3 non-profit organization. These types of non-profit organizations are not to endorse one political candidate over another, precisely what Clarion seems to have done, and is now busy hiding its track records. NPR reported on this, and the possibility of a forthcoming FEC probe.

The article should have emphasized that all Americans are subsidizing Aish, The Clarion Fund, EMET, Hasbara Fellowships/Israel Advocacy, HonestReporting etc. as long as contributions to these groups are tax-deductible.

From p. 6.

NPR has reported that an organization called Endowment for Middle East Truth (EMET), is also responsible for distribution of the Obsession DVD. Like Honestreporting.com, the "Middle East Truth" being bandied about here is yet another self-described Zionist/pro-Israel understanding of the reality whose policies are in line with Likud militant expansionism, with the stated mission of support for Israel, and opposing any "concessions" from Israel as part of a peace agreement with Palestinians, even the withdrawal from the occupied territory of Gaza. The positions of EMET are the positions of Likud party in Israel, and that of the illegal Settler movement. It was EMET that on March 25th, 2008 sponsored a showing of Obsession on Capitol Hill.

Likud is a specific party. EMET is a sort of Jabotinskian (i.e., politicized ethnic fundamentalist) Zionist group while Aish belongs more to the occult nationalist current of Zionist thinking (e.g., Jack Abramoff, Moshe Tendler, Michael Medved), but there two groups of Zionists usually work together fairly easily with each other and with Lubavitchers, who tend to a more general anti-gentile ideology.

 

All three groups are quite good at co-opting the US government to serve their purposes, and often groups like the Hillel Society echo there opinions. The Hillel Society used to make (and may still make) massive fundraising campaigns with a letter that is signed by Bronfman and that accuses Hatem Bazian, Huwaida Arraf and Mahdi Bray of being terrorism supporters. Such letters go to a tremendous number of government officials and form the backbone of stealth Zionist propagandization. It might also be possible to challenge the status of the Hillel Society as a recipient of tax deductible contributions. In general a coordinated attack on massive tax fraud associated with the organized Jewish community would probably be a good thing.

 

From p. 6.

Adelson, who owns many casinos in Las Vegas, has been a longtime contributor to the Zionist Organization of America, Sarah Stern's former employer. Now that Stern is at EMET, she has sponsored lecture series and seminars on Capital Hill in name of Adelson, to extend his influence into the Congress.

In fact, his 2nd wife Miriam Ochshorn may be the main instigator of Adelson's Zionism. Her family has long association with Jabotinskian Zionist politics. It is a fairly common pattern among ethnic Ashkenazim. Midge Dector brought Norman Podhoretz to Jabotinskian Zionism, Gertrude Himmelfarb recruited her husband Irving Kristol. Himmelfarb and Kristol are the parents of William Kristol. Zionist politics is very much a family affair, and ethnic Ashkenazi culture often gives females an important role economically and in interaction with non-Jews. Had I the resources, I would craft a political attack on Jabotinskian and occult zionists for giving material aid to Zionist terrorism.

 

From p. 7.

To place Adelson on the political spectrum, it is good to recall that he has described himself as a critic of AIPAC—from the far right! In other words, he feels that AIPAC (American Israel Public Affairs Committee) has been too soft on Palestinians. (!) Adelson has been a longtime contributor to Jewish and Republican causes, including the campaigns of George W. Bush. Initially, he had designs of spending $250 million dollars to set up an organization called Freedom Watch to keep Obama out of the White House. Freedom Watch, conceived of as the Right's answer to Moveon.org, has been a meeting ground between Jewish Republicans and former officials of the George W. Bush administration. Such is the agenda of Adelson, the person whose influence is behind the EMET folks distributing the Obsession DVD.

Adelson is also heavily involved with the RJC. See the blog entry RJC and CUFI Incite Islamophobia, which describes:

• Neo-Conservatives such as R. James Woolsey, Frank Gaffney (another Neo-Con who has received awards from the Zionist Organization of America), Ariel Cohen (from the Neo-Conservative bastion Heritage), David Dalin (from the Neo-Con Hoover Institute and also Heritage).
• Ardent pro-Israel lobbyists such as: Daniel Pipes, Caroline Glick (deputy managing editor of Jerusalem Post), Meyrav Wurmser (the former director of the highly biased MEMRI, a propaganda organization founded by members of the Israeli Defense Force), Also serving on the Board of EMET are many of the "talking heads" would-be experts of Obsession, such as Walid Shoebat.
• Christian Zionists: EMET also reaches out to Christians—or one should specify, Christian Zionists—by featuring Rev. James. M. Hutchens, who founded an organization called The Jerusalem Connection International.

I usually distinguish between Jabotinskian Neoconservatism, an ideology used to mobilize Jews, and Friedmanite Neoliberalism, an ideology used to mobilize Jews and non-Jews. This sort of duality occurred in the past. Ashkenazi Zionism mobilized Jews while Ashkenazi Bolshevism mobilized Jews and non-Jews, but the current system works far better than the older one because Jabotinskians and Friedmanites have no problem with collaboration while in the past Ashkenazi Zionists and Bolsheviks used to fight with one another.

 

From p. 10:

No wonder that the NY Times described her as a "radical Islamophobe."

The comments on NY Times article when correlated with the Jewishness of names were also quite interesting.

Also from p. 10:

That makes it all the more devastating, and disappointing, that centrally-situated and powerful Jewish organizations from both Israel and the United States are now deploying the same Other-ing strategies against other minority groups, with hardly a voice of dissent being heard from other 11

Jewish organizations. Indeed, Obsession is already tearing down bridges of dialogue between Muslim and Jewish groups across the country that had taken years to establish.

The organized Jewish community has been "other-ing" for a long time, and there is a lot of dishonesty in its interfaith activities.

I have tried to address the ongoing Zionist battle for control of discourse in

• Judonia Rising: The Israel Lobby and American Society or
• Judonia Rising: The Israel Lobby and American Society (PDF).

I divide the first and second parts as follows:

• Part 1: "The Politics of Israel without the Distraction of Israeli Politics," i.e. how the Israel Lobby maintains or takes control of political discourse in the USA
• Part 2: "The History of Israel without the Distraction of Israeli History", i.e., how the system arose.

 

 

Sphere: Related Content