Showing posts with label Gaza. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Gaza. Show all posts

Thursday, December 17, 2009

Protestant missionaries: the Palestinians are like Jesus and Israel is like the Romans

Representatives of several U.S. Protestant denominations have published a letter comparing Israel to the Roman Empire and the Palestinians to Jesus. (Read it here: "O Come, O Come Emmanuel!") The letter, which takes the form of an Advent prayer quoting Isaiah's prayer for the coming of the messiah, was signed by missionaries representing, among other denominations, the Evangelical Lutheran Church in America, United Church of Christ, and the United Methodist Church.

Their letter starts on a religious note (" 'O Come, O Come Emmanuel!' we will sing and pray as we make the advent journey to Christmas"), but it quickly shifts gears. The second paragraph provides a distorted, one-sided outline of Israeli actions in Gaza and the West Bank over the past year, using the typical tactics of describing the incursion into Gaza in isolation from its historical background, using casualty numbers which do not differentiate combatant casualties from civilian ones, and suppressing information about Hamas use of human shields.

The letter also claims that Israel in 2009 evicted hundreds of Palestinian families in the West Bank and destroyed their homes in order to expand Israeli settlements. In support of this shocking claim, the letter cites a webpage at the Palestine Monitor website (read here) which in turn cites an unnamed study by the U.N. Rather than supporting the letter's claim that hundreds of West Bank homes were destroyed, the U.N. study figures quoted by Palestine Monitor claim only 43 homes were demolished (excluding those damaged in the Gaza war) and makes no mention whatsoever of settlement expansion. The Palestine Monitor article does go on to claim without citing a source that hundreds of Palestinian homes are "threatened by Israel’s policies", however, that article simply does not support the claim made in the missionaries' letter concerning hundreds of West Bank home destructions to expand settlements in 2009.


The letter then goes on to compare Israel's actions to those of the ancient Romans, stating:

Reflecting on the society into which Jesus was born, we see many similarities to life here today. The ancient Israelites were occupied and suffered at the hands of a foreign power. The Roman occupied lived freely, able to use and abuse the local population at will, while the subjugated peoples lived in constant uncertainty and anxiety, never sure how they would be treated or whether they would be singled out for random punishment. This is being repeated today for Palestinians living under the longest occupation in modern history, generally trying to live life and survive, but sometimes crossing the line into illegal and counterproductive violence, such as firing rockets from Gaza into Israel. O Come, O Come Emmanuel!

To put this comparison in perspective, remember that the Roman forces in Judea are said to have massacred tens (if not hundreds) of thousands including woman and children, literally festooning roads with their crucified victims. The Roman war against the Jews included the Romans burning Jerusalem, including the temple, to the ground.

And of course, there was that whole Christ-killing thing... The letter goes on to subtly invoke that old standby, Jewish deicide:

What the Palestinian community faces, Jesus knew when he walked these stony hills.


True to form, the letter concludes with both a prayer and a pitch for members of these denominations to put their religious commitment to promoting peace and justice into action through participation in church-sponsored anti-Israel activism. It provides links to various websites which purport to even-handedly promote peace but, in fact, focus mainly on Israel-bashing -- for example, one maintained by the Evangelical Lutheran Church in America entitled "Peace Not Walls". (Read here.)

That ELCA webpage touts a fraudulent series of four maps purporting to show Palestinian losses and Israeli gains since 1946. In fact, it offers free of charge laminated cards bearing that series of maps to those who request them. These maps (which are commonly promoted by anti-Israel activists) utterly distort the history of the region by conflating several categories of "having land" (individual ownership, various forms of political control, etc.), by completely ignoring the historical context of Arab losses and by simply lying. The first map (labeled "Palestinian and Jewish land 1946", see below), shows land owned by Jews or Jewish agencies in white and all other land in the area, including the Negev and Judean wilderness, in green. It claims that the green was "Palestinian land", although, in fact, most of this land was not owned by either Jews or Arabs, was under the political control of the British Empire and was vacant.

http://weblogs.asp.net/blogs/rosherove/WindowClipping%20(6)_3u9DbQ.png

Thus a map of the 1947 U.N. partition plan which divided the area between Jews and Arabs appears to show a massive loss of "Palestinian land", reflecting the fact that the largely vacant and inarable Negev desert was partitioned by the U.N. to Israeli political authority. The third map in the series (labeled "1949 - 1967") shows further decline in "Palestinian land" which resulted from Arab losses in the 1948 war. That map fails to mention that that war was a war of aggression started by the Arab states, thereby absolving them of responsibility for those losses. That map also describes the Egyptian-occupied Gaza Strip and the Jordanian-occupied West Bank and East Jerusalem as "Palestinian land". The last map (labeled "2000") inexplicably shows more than half of the West Bank, including the entire Jordan Valley excluding Jericho, as "Israeli land".

http://deutsche.files.wordpress.com/2007/10/palestine-2disrael-2dloss-2dland-2d1946-2dto-2d2000.jpg


All prayers for peace and for the coming of the messiah aside, it doesn't take much to see this sort of thing for what it is: deliberately distorted anti-Israel propaganda dressed up in sheep's clothing. It would do every party to this conflict so much more good if those who purport to advocate peace would do so by promoting accurate, well-balanced views of the history of the conflict and by avoiding deliberately inflammatory invocations of Christ-killing imagery. At this or any other time of year, is that too much to ask?


NOTE: For those interested in following up on this letter, either by researching its signatories or by replying to them, the names of the signatories are listed below:

  • Allison K. Schmitt, deployed staff member, Global Mission, Evangelical Lutheran Church in America;
  • Bethany Fullerton, Bethlehem;
  • Rev. Ian W.Alexander, Global Ministries – UCC/Disciples;
  • Heather & Ryan Lehman, Jerusalem
  • Janet Lahr Lewis; United Methodist Liaison in Israel and Palestine
  • Rev. Mark K. Holman, Pastor of the English-speaking Congregation at Lutheran Church of the Redeemer, Old City, Jerusalem
  • Peter Miller, Jerusalem

Friday, February 6, 2009

Intercepted Gaza "aid" ship had no aid


Last night, Israel intercepted a freighter that was supposedly filled with 60 tons of aid for Gaza, that originated in Tripoli.

Predictably, the moonbats have been hysterical over this, saying that Israel was shooting at the people on the ship and then beating them

Free Gaza's update on the ship last night was telling: its 8 PM (Central European Time) report said

The Israelis said the boat can not go to Gaza, and it appears they will try to force it to Arish, but the captain intends to push forward. (And having been aboard the TALI I think it will take more than a ramming to sink it)
In other words, the "peace activists" were really hoping for a fight.

From the times of the reports, it is clear that Israel warned the ship for several hours before boarding it.

The only reporter who is saying that Israel beat and threatened them is the embeddedAl Jazeera reporter.

Israel took the ship to Ashdod to examine the contents and question the passengers. According to Haaretz, the "60 tons" of aid was imaginary:
The Israel Defense Forces said that troops found about 150 bottles of mineral water and a few dozen kilograms of food and medicine on board, despite earlier claims that it was carrying dozens of tons of humanitarian aid.

The Tali, a cargo vessel flying the flag of the West African state of Togo, was sent by the Palestinian National Committee Against the Siege in cooperation with the U.S.-based Free Gaza Movement. Its cargo was claimed to have included about 60 tons of medicine, food and toys, plus 10,000 units of human blood plasma which requires constant refrigeration.
So these pro-terror "peace activists" are caught lying. Again.

And one of the "human rights" activists on the ship has a bit of a checkered history:
Military sources said that on board the vessel - dubbed the "Brotherhood Ship" - were nine people, including Greek-Catholic Archbishop of Jerusalem Monsignor Hilarion Capucci, who was arrested in 1974 after being caught smuggling weapons from Lebanon to activists in the Palestine Liberation Organization.
Which is exactly what one would expect a "peace activist" to do, right?

For context, here are the amounts of aid that Israel shipped into Gaza over the past few days:

February 1 - 4,656 tons of supplies
February 2 - 5,354 tons of supplies
February 3 - 
6,106 tons of supplies
February 4 - 
5,367 tons of supplies

So even though they were lying about the "60 tons," it is about what three trucks carry. This is hardly an efficient way to get aid to Gazans. (I have not heard about any shortage of blood plasma in Gaza, either.)

Wednesday, January 14, 2009

Juan Cole's libels against Israel continue

Juan Cole, on his blog, the humorously misnamed Informed Comment, has baselessly claimed that Israel has suspended the right to free speech.  He writes here of what he calls "(d)raconian, almost martial-law repressive measures taken by the Israeli state to curb freedom of speech at this moment".  Would someone tell me exactly what free speech restrictions Israelis allegedly suffer under?   Israelis are free to debate, protest, publish opposing viewpoints and exercise all the freedoms any resident of a democracy should expect to have. They exercise these rights all the time, as anyone with any knowledge of the situation knows.  Why does Cole feel the need to invent this sort of charge?

And where is Cole's outrage over the lack of free speech under Hamas?  Does he believe that Gazans have been free to exercise free speech under Hamas, or does he simply not care about their rights?  Was he outraged when Hamas assassinated those who expressed support for Fatah?  Why did that merit not a single mention on "Informed Comment"?

Where was Cole's outrage over Hamas' summary expulsion of Amira Hass, a pro-Palestinian Israel journalist who had been reporting from Gaza (albeit under Hamas censorship and with 24-hour-a-day Hamas handlers overseeing her activities and restricting her access to interview Palestinians)?  (Read here and here.)  Hass had been in Gaza for only two weeks operating under truly draconian, martial-law restrictions before mildly critical articles (read an example here) led Hamas to kick her out.  Please note that Hamas was upset with Hass precisely because she reported on their violations against Palestinians' basic human rights to freedom of speech and freedom of religion.

Cole would rather invent charges about Israel's violations of civil rights than report the real offenses committed by Hamas.  Cole apparently does not consider those offenses noteworthy.

The funny part is, after making his absurd charge concerning Israel's "draconian martial-law" crackdown, Cole goes on to site several examples of anti-war demonstrations in Israel, including demonstrations by Muslims and Druze.  Now that he has informed us of these exceptions to the alleged rule, can he site a single example of a Israeli demonstration that was prevented?  Can Cole cite a single Israeli anti-war column that was censored? He seems to have a much easier time finding examples of exceptions than evidence of the rule. 

Wednesday, September 10, 2008

Alan Hart: Israel kidnapped Alan Johnston ... "by default"

Regular readers of this blog may remember my posts about retired journalist and anti-Israel polemicist Alan Hart blaming Israel for the kidnapping of BBC reporter Alan Johnston. (Read here and here and here.) Before it was known whether Johnston was alive or dead, Hart had the gall to state that, if Johnston had been killed, the Israelis were behind it. His "reasoning" for these absurd accusations?

"The Palestinians were the party with absolutely nothing to gain and much to lose from Alan's permanent removal from the scene ... He was, in short, the best and most informed provider of news about the Palestinian side of the story; a story which, in many of its details, is an embarrassment to Israel ... (A)nd if he has been murdered, Alan's death, if it could be blamed on a Palestinian or a pro-Palestinian Arab and/or other Islamist group, would be a huge political setback for the legitimacy of the Palestinian struggle and the present leadership of it."
(Original posted April 16, 2007, archived here.)

Hart started with the conclusion that best fit his bias, then determined that the facts simply had to support that conclusion. To Hart, this constituted proof positive. His post understandably elicited a deluge of criticism in the form of posted comments condemning Hart's absurd "logic" and accusing him of anti-Semitism. Hart responded by moderating his blog comments and the criticism ceased.

In fact, as became clear over the ensuing months, Alan Johnston had been kidnapped and held for a huge ransom by an Islamist group styling itself the "Army of God" or "Tawhid and Jihad Brigades" -- an "army" which, it was later discovered, was one of Gaza's crime families , the Doğmuş. (Read here.) It is unclear whether the Islamist jihadi cause was merely a cover for the Doğmuş, or if the distinction between jihadi and criminal is one imposed by outside observers -- a distinction without a difference.

On July 4, 2007, Johnston was released by his Palestinian captors. None of what Hart had written had been true. His allegations were merely a conspiracy woven by a mind consumed with hatred for everything Israeli and blinded to any evil without an Israeli behind it.

Well...everyone makes mistakes. Under the circumstances, one would hope that Hart would apologize, post a correction, or at least let the subject drop. But he hasn't done this. In fact, a few days ago, Hart posted this:

"...re Alan Johnston... We still do not know, and may never know, if his kidnappers were proxies - by design or default - for another party..."

The Delphic pronouncement "proxies by design or default" is a puzzle. Hart seems to be intimating through this ineffable koan that he believes Israel responsible for the kidnapping "by default" even if they were not directly involved. We must meditate upon this then consult the bepompadoured oracle.


It's pretty clear that Hart seems unconcerned when the facts don't live up to his idea of what they should be; he simply invents his own. He's also not worried about seeming a bigot. For the sheer absurdity of it, you gotta love Hart's catch-all permanent defense against charges of anti-Semitism (read here):

"One of my favourite souvenirs from my television reporting days for ITN and then the BBC's Panorama programme is a signed photograph of Prime Minister Golda Meir. The inscription in her own hand is: "To a good friend, Alan Hart. Golda Meir." Question: Do you think that old lady, Mother Israel, was so stupid that she could not have seen through me if I was ... a 'Jew hater'?"
Hart, who may be prone to what psychologists describe as "magical thinking", seems to think that Golda Meir was clairvoyant on these matters. He also seems to think that, by inscribing that photo "good friend", she was granting him some sort of continuous absolution.

Hart's magical thinking sometimes takes the form of prophetic narcissism -- a sort of Jerusalem syndrome where he sees himself as Jeremiah speaking truth to power. The following excerpts from a rambling bio were apparently written by Hart about himself in the third person. He features the full length self-promo both on the main page of his blog and attaches it to his postings on other websites (read here and here):

"Alan has long believed that what peacemaking needs above all else is some TRUTH-TELLING, about many things but, especially, the difference between Zionist mythology and real history, and, the difference between Jews and Judaism on the one hand and Zionists and Zionism on the other. (The Zionism of the title and substance of Alan's latest book is, of course, political Zionism or Jewish nationalism as the creating and sustaining force of the Zionist state, not what could be called the spiritual Zionism of Judaism).

"* Alan Hart, author of Zionism: The Real Enemy of the Jews, is indicting mainstream media complicity in suppression of truth!"
and
"Alan is a fiercely independent thinker. He hates all labels and isms and has never been a member of any political party or group. He prefers to judge issues on their merits. When asked what drives him, he used to say: “I have three children and, when the world falls apart, I want to be able to look them in the eye and say, ‘Don’t blame me. I tried.’” ... Alan ... has to be able to live with himself. He believes that heaven and hell are states of mind."


On the website for his book entitled ZIONISM THE REAL ENEMY OF THE JEWS A Book for Peace, he refers to his own book as:

"the first ever informed and honest debate about who must do what and why if there's to be a peaceful resolution of the Palestine problem."

He also claims (in the video embedded below) that he "could have stopped" the 1967 Six Day War.



If you think his vanity, unreliability and absurd grandiosity would discredit Hart in the eyes of other anti-Israel zealots, forget about it. He fits right in.
Counterpunch publishes Hart's calls for an end to the state of Israel (read here). MPACUK (Muslim Political Action Committee U.K.) promotes his books with online interviews (read here).

Britain's Islam Channel tapped Hart to chair a 2006 anti-Israel conference. A glowing account of his participation is featured on the conspiracy website Rense.com (read here). The Jerusalem Post account is online here. Hart's fellow participants at that conference included Ilan Pappe (to his right in the photo below), and one of the oft-photographed Naturei Karta guys in full charedi regalia.


[As an aside, the Rense website amusingly describes the charedi guy as "Rabbi Ahron Cohen, whose house had been bombarded with 1,000 eggs, presumably by Zionists, (a) few weeks ago". (Please post your punchlines to the comments section of this post.) An explanation for this high cholesterol barrage may be found in the the Jerusalem Post report. It says Cohen "was a member of the delegation that went to Iran to offer support to President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad in March following his comments that Israel should be wiped off the map."]


There's a danger in my pointing out just how absurd Alan Hart is. You may not take his potential impact seriously. That would be a mistake. Hart's first book, a laudatory biography of Yassir Arafat, is very widely read and cited. Hart also continues to be featured as a speaker at international conferences. In 2007, Hart delivered the keynote address at the Empower India Conference in Banagalore, which was sponsored by the Muslim political organization Popular Front for India . (Read here and here and here.) Not surprisingly, Hart's prescription for empowering India focused on India opposing Israel and resisting America's

"imperial project to have India as their Israel in this part of the world".





In spite of his monomaniacal focus on Israel and Jews, his pomposity and his long-windedness, Hart knows how to communicate his message effectively. He made a career as a television journalist and his skills as a public speaker are well-honed. An audience which is either naive or receptive to his message might well be convinced that what he says is true. That's why it needs to be pointed out that his unfounded accusation that Israel's hidden hand was behind Alan Johnston's kidnapping is not an anomaly. It's entirely consistent with Hart's worldview of fantastic conspiracy theories with Israel at their center.

Plausible sounding conspiracy theories presented by articulate, seemingly reliable figures present a real threat and need to be exposed.

CONTACT

adamhollandblog [AT] gmail [DOT] com
http://www.wikio.com