Sharon says anti-Semitism drives Israel's critics

[Herschel]

Israeli Prime Minister Ariel Sharon said foreign criticism of Israel's use of force against Palestinians in a three-year-old uprising is motivated by a new form of anti-Semitism.

''Around the world, time and again, Israel is criticised for exercising its right of self-defence by using excessive force,'' Sharon, speaking in English, told visiting Jewish activists from Canada late on Wednesday.

Those who reject Israel's ''right to use force to defend itself'' also effectively deny its ''birthright to exist'' in its ancestral homeland, he added.

cut

http://famulus.msnbc.com/FamulusIntl/reuters11-12-215010.asp?reg=MIDEAST

============================

Is any country as criticized as little Israel is for defending herself? Oh, my.

[thebigidea]

1. I thought it was Snickers bars and Jolt Cola that drove critics

[Maple]

2. Sharon

says all manner of strange things.

[bluesoul]

3. Wow, now even Sharon's words

are to be taken as credible over here. Surprise after surprise...

[thebigidea]

4. Sharon is a man of peace! The fence is because of security!

War is peace!

[Forkboy]

5. As a fellow progressive

I'm sure you able to see that Sharon's charge is simply untrue.I hate Bush...am I anti-American? I think you know the answer.

[Gimel]

78. Motivation

was the issue, not statements per se. Take everything at face value and the world will be totally confusing.

[el_gato]

6. that card is played so often it's wearing out

[Forkboy]

8. Which is sad

because anti-semitism is real and a serious problem.Unfortunately,posters like this use it every turn in every instance and it loses it's meaning.Herschel doesn't seem to realize the true damage that is done to "little Israel" in this way.

[Resistance]

81. exactly Forkboy

[edzontar]

92. Well said, Forkboy...

Criticizing Israeli government policy is not anti-semitic, it is free speech, and many in Israel are critical of it too.

End of argument--next!!

[Supply Side Jesus]

7. and you must hate hispanics if you oppose Estrada!

and anti-woman if you dont like Priscilla Owens!

Give it up Sharon, I can smell your desperation all the way here in the west.

[newyorican]

9. tiresome bleating...

from an tiresome man that needs a rendezvous with reality.

[Gimel]

73. Hilarious comment

:bounce:

[Name removed]

10. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[arcane1]

11. "self-defence by using excessive force"

uh, I think it's that "excessive" part that gets criticized, dumbass... save the race card for when it's actully warranted

:eyes:

(on edit, for clarity- the aforementioned dumbass is Sharon)

[ThorsteinVeblen]

12. Good for Sharon

That guy has about as much credibility with me as Bush does.

Herschel posts this thinking it proves something. All it proves to me is that Sharon is an evil man willing to use the holocaust to justify his policies.

[arcane1]

13. like the way Bush uses 9/11 to justify his

but I guess if I criticize the policies of George Bush, then I hate America

or do I hate democracy?

or Christianity?

or white people?

or Texans?

:shrug:


god forbid someone criticize a policy because of the policy itself!!

[Name removed]

14. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[edzontar]

15. Yawn!!!!! Here we go AGAIN....

Anti-Sharon equals Anti-Semitism, and from the mouth of the very man himself!!!

PUH-LEEZ.

[bemildred]

16. Sharonovic continues in the footsteps of his predecessors.

:puke:

That is quite a quote:

"exercising its right of self-defence by using excessive force"

[bluesoul]

17. I don't know if he realises

that excessive force ammounts to war crimes in most occasions...

[The Magistrate]

25. In Fairness, Mr. Mildred

It is not his native tongue, and he seems to be attempting a paraphrase of what others say. The meaning aimed for is something like: "People charge Israel with using excessive force when it exercises its right to self-defense." That is a debateable proposition, for there are indeed some who seem to feel just about any use of force by Israel excessive, and that position does seem to verge on denying Israel has any right to self-defense. There are others who seem to feel self-defense justifies just about any use of force, and that position seems to verge on proclaiming Israel can do no wrong. Neither position quite captures the actualities of the regretable conflict between the two peoples.

[bemildred]

26. I thought so too, but saw no reason to be fair to Mr. Sharon.

You have, of course, elucidated the real issue, which is
the confusion about what should be characterized as self-defense
and what must be taken as other sorts of violent activities.

I doubt that any reasonable person would expect anyone to be
attacked without attempting to defend themselves; the question
is what actions are legitimate to that end. The attempted claim
that it is one's self-defense that is being criticized is, of course,
a form of propaganda intended to short-circuit that debate.

[sushi]

43. I would have thought

the fact that the whole world, except for Israel, the US, the Marshall islands, and sometimes Micronesia, is against Israel's actions against the Palestinians proves that Israel is using excessive force when it exercises its right to self-defense.

[The Magistrate]

47. That Proves Nothing, Ma'am

Votes like that are a coin of friendship, to be spent when some other vote, or an appointment to the diplomatic bureacracy's sinicures, is desired. The General Assembly is nothing but a city council writ large, when all is said and done, dealing chiefly in the patronage of who is hired on by the civil service, and where development funds go. There are many glories to representative and deliberative government, but no one has ever pretended unanimity among alderman ever established the truth of anything except that the vote was painless, or just what the Boss desired.

[edzontar]

93. I don't entirely agree, Mr. Magistrate

Your point that much more (or less) than morailty is at play in international relations is an important one.

But the unanimity of world opinion viz a viz the settlements and Israeli actions in the territory should still be taken seriously.

The fact is that both the settlements and the occupation are illegal and have been declared as such in a number of UN resolutions going back 30 years.

The US is widely viewed--and correctly, in my opinion, as to beholden to Israeli interests in this matter--even in the case of egregious policies like the ones practiced by Mr. Sharon, which have been condemned by a rich tapestry of voices WITHIN the Israeli establishment as well.

[The Magistrate]

The Machine Hiccoughed

[The Magistrate]

95. As A Thought Experiment, Sir

Reverse the matter, and suppose there was near unamimous support, as a result of the ordinary processes of log-rolling and arm-twisting: would that make any difference to your views, or make you doubt the rightness of them?

Much that Israel does in the lands overrun in '67 is wrong: a great deal of it, including some of what is wrong, is necessary in the total circumstance of war persisting for decades.

[truthspeaker]

18. that gives me an idea

I'm going to shoot my neighbor and kick his wife and kids out of his house so one of my friends can live there, and I'm going to call it self-defense. Anyone who complains about it is anti-truthspeaker.

Sharon's statement is an insult to the millions of Jews throughout history who really have been victimns of anti-Semitism.

[MrSoundAndVision]

19. I don't know even the slightest about the Jewish religion....

Nor do I care to know. Nor do I really care to know anything about Islam. That's the great thing about agnosticism, I don't have to care. So I don't.

So, I say that Israel is turning the Palestinian population into prisoners, and Israeli's militants are it's guards and warden. And it's morally repugnant. And the wall must come down, because it reminds many of us agnostics of another wall, in Poland.

That was easy, and argument against the Israeli aggression that is not anti-Semitic, because I don't even know what that means.

[Gimel]

28. Reminding you

If you are disturbed about the present because of your past, how can you deny that the right of Jews to a homeland? It is the very historical prejudice and culturally defined hatred that led to the greatest mass genocide known to history. There is no need for knowledge of the religion, only of history, and a humanisticly guided mentality.

[tinnypriv]

20. Internal contradiction within two sentences

A new record for fat boy.

[Jim Sagle]

21. Herschel and Sharon nail it again! Thanks guys!

:thumbsup:

[Classical_Liberal]

22. I guess you professed candidate Howard Dean is

an antisemite, because he criticized Israel.

[Forkboy]

23. Again?

what else do you agree with Sharon on?

[bluesoul]

24. Pretty much

anything I guess...

[KoKo]

27. Anyone who disagrees with Sharon, is defintely anti-semetic. Absolutely!

He defines what anti-semitism is.....yes....of course.

[Gimel]

29. Right to self-defense

For the Jewish nation to have a right of existence includes the right of self-defense. To be continually chased around the globe by one anti-Jewish despotic government or another is the fate of a people who are a favorite scape-goat if they have not a homeland.

Denying this right is to expose the Jewish nation to extinction. That is genocidal. Forget the word anti-Semitic, there are other ways to describe this hatred.

[bluesoul]

30. And those of us that critisize Sharon

wan't the Jews to extinct and wish them genocide? Oh please....

[Gimel]

31. Criticism of Sharon

This is not the topic. Such accusations are really out of context. Israel can be criticized. Of course there are errors in war. There are many tragic accidents in war and peace. To march in the face of the IDF when it is active in apprhending terrorists and preventing attacks on Israel's citizens is blatantly anti-Israel. Draw your own conclusions. Israel has the right to carry out these actions.

[Violet_Crumble]

32. Are you in the right thread?

Because the topic of the thread is Sharon claiming that criticism of the Israeli govt is anti-semitic...

Violet...

[Gimel]

35. I've reread the article at least 4 times

Sharon is talking about Israel's right to self-defense. Only in post 22 or there about, is criticizm of Israel mentioned.

[bluesoul]

36. And you believe Sharon

that anything Israel does is indeed self-defense?

[Gimel]

38. "anything"

you'll have to define that. As I said, tragic mistakes are made in war and peace. Not "everything" is in self-defense.

[bluesoul]

40. You call it "tragic"

Many see it as deliberate...

[rini]

61. of course

"many" do. That is the point of the article.

[Violet_Crumble]

62. So you think many of us in this forum are anti-semitic?

Just curious...

Violet...

[bluesoul]

63. Nice try

Criticism is NOT anti-semitism. But if you consider us as such, then I don't have much to say to you really...

[Violet_Crumble]

65. Were you talking to Rini?

It's just yr post showed up as a reply to mine. As I in no way think that criticism of Israel's excessive use of force = anti-semitism, I'm guessing you were addressing the post to rini...


Violet...

[bluesoul]

66. That was for RINI

of course! :)

[Gimel]

79. Criticism

of your criticism seems to be anti-something. You don't seem to understand!

[Violet_Crumble]

60. Tragic mistakes?

Sorry, but when the same tragic mistakes are made over and over again, that's when most people looking at an issue rationally start to suspect that there's a degree of deliberateness to those 'tragic accidents'....

What actions taken by Israel in the Occupied Territories aren't in self-defence? I'd be interested to know...

Violet...

[Gimel]

71. Building economy and infastructure

Much was done (a casino among other enterprises) in the West Bank prior to the Intifada. Much more was planned.

Hope springs eternal, and new plans are being made to bridge the differences and support the Palestinian economy. Seek and ye shall find.

[edzontar]

94. Some actions are not "mistakes"--they are POLICY

Like the settlements, whose goal is to permanently annex certain lands in the territories, in the name of "greater Israel" (Judea and Samaria).

Oh, by the way, not only are "races" a completely discredited myth, but both peoples--Israeli Jews AND Palestinians of all religions (or none, for that matter)--have deep ethnic and genealogical roots in the region.

They will have to find a way to live together somehow, I would suggest.

[Violet_Crumble]

59. And?

The topic of this thread is about Sharon, despite yr protestations to the contrary. And criticism of Israel for using excessive for IS criticism of Israel....

So, do you agree with Sharon's claim that criticism of Israel's use of force is anti-semitic?

Violet...

[Gimel]

72. Not entirely

Some is simply speaking on personal beliefs without true understanding of the elements involved, the motivations and the political history.

I don't accept most of what consists of looking for human interest and acceptance as true criticism. It is neither focused or relevant.

[bluesoul]

33. If they have the right to do whatever they want

then the Palestinians have nothing left but to respond the same way, sorry it's a two way street. You can't have it only your way....

[Violet_Crumble]

34. Deleted post...

Thought it was a reply to me...*blush*

Violet...

[Gimel]

37. Couldn't get any worse

The 100+ suicide attacks in one month drove the IDF to re-enter the PA territories. Are you giving them permission to continue?

[bluesoul]

39. As though there was nothing before those suicide bombings

that could incite such actions...

[hossdiddy]

41. Sure,

the PA and the other Arab leaders incite these actions to deflect their people's attention away from their blatant corruption and utter failure.

And, long before this "brutal" occupation started in which the Palestinians attained the highest standard of living among Arabs, until they started their stupidfada.

[Darranar]

42. And, of course...

the IDF's actions have absolutely nothing whatsoever to do with it...

Israel's occupation has nothing to do with it...

The expanding settlements have nothing to do with it...

It's all the fault of the PA!

Rrrrriiiiiiggggghhhhht... If you say so...

[drewb]

44. Who is littler??? Little Israel or Little Kucinich????

:nopity:

[Name removed]

45. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Lurking Dem]

46. All Jews except converts are Semitic DNA-wise.

Aside from that Sharon was born in Kfar Malal.

But I guess you think all Jews are from Eastern Europe.

edit typo

[Scott Lee]

48. Are you telling me that there's a "Jewish Gene"?

Please say yes....

[Darranar]

49. There are genetic similarities between ethnic Jews, yes.

[Paschall]

57. What do you mean "genetic similarities?"

Rather vague.

Blacks may be said to be "genetically similar" (in quotes) because, statistically speaking, they are more susceptible to sickle cell anemia--a genetic modification of their red blood cells, an evolutionary adaptation that protects them in some degree from the effects of malaria.

According to all the most recent science I've read, however, the notions of "race" and attendant "racial characteristics" (the physical expression of genetic similitudes, if you will) are biologically nil. Researchers are unable to determine the so-called race of an individual on mere examination of his/her genes.

Of course, I'm introducing here the notion of "race" (only to deny it), but talk of "genetic similarities" immediately evokes it.

Seeking more nuance. Can you please clarify?

[Lurking Dem]

68. Read the link and go from there.

[The Magistrate]

74. It Is No Great Mystery, Mr. Paschall

The invocation of race is yours, and irrelevant to this. Common descent is traceable through a variety of genetic markers, as is time of divergence from a common ancestor. This applies to any ethnic group.

You seem to be moving crab-wise towards a claim that European Jewry has no ancestral connection to the Levant. Maintaining that requires genuine ignorance of history.

[BlackFrancis]

75. everyone's lineage goes back to middle east

Possible exception if you believe in the regional continuity theory, but anyone of European descent almost certainly does even with that allowance.

[The Magistrate]

76. Through, Perhaps, Mr. Francis

But not back. Modern humans certainly spread through the place out of Africa, and in several waves. The present European population does not stem from the Levant, but more from the Celtic heartlands of Central Asia.

[BlackFrancis]

77. they might have stopped..

I mean at this point who the hell really knows or cares :shrug:

[The Magistrate]

84. These Things Are Quite Traceable, Mr. Frances

There are people who devote their lives to it, and put us all in their debt for the knowledge. It has been a long time since the matter was of great interest to me, but for a period pre-Roman Europe was a fascination.

People are interested in past developments for reasons ranging from curiousity to stocking their magazines for propaganda fusilades. This particular subject here comes in for a lot of the latter. This particular exchange commenced when a couple of people thought they would be able to "stick it" to their opponents on the field of racial exclusitivity, doubtless imagining they could indulge in all sorts of "Aryan" comparison: one even put up a note down in "Ask the Administrators" asking if he could open a discussion on that question here. Other people have felt it to their interest in advocating for Arab Palestine ro claim European Jews cannot trace ancestry to the Levant, or to any Semitic stock at all, on a variety of trumped-up grounds.

[Paschall]

85. No, you mistake me, Magistrate

I'm not moving crab-wise or otherwise in any direction. I'm merely affirming what I understand to be the most recent science on the study of that specious concept "race."

As I admit, I do indeed evoke the issue of "race" because of the talk of genes. But you'll note--based, again, on my grasp of current science--I state the concept is scientifically nil.

To make that a little more explicit, as I understand it, such genetic markers are in fact so widespread and so widely mixed throughout the human population that it is impossible for researchers to determine an individual's "race" solely from examination of his genes. Thus it is scientifically impossible to find any empirical data on which to found a concept of "race." While these markers are traceable, giving us the new field of genetic anthropology, these markers in themselves have no meaning--again--with regard to more the primitive concept of "race."

I would quickly add that the posters above who have said there are "genetica similiarities among Jews" might have stated the same notion a bit more accurately if they had said certain Jews share common genetic markers, just as we all share genetic markers with our forebears over the eons, in all their (genetic) diversity. But I'm perhaps being nitpicky.

Regarding your other remark, I would never deny that European Jewry had its ancestral origins in the Levant. (rini, read that sentence eight times before hitting the Alert button, please!)

[The Magistrate]

87. The Comment You Replied To, Sir

Made no mention of race, nor does mention of genetic similarity imply a reference to race. It pointed merely towards a demonstrable degree of commonality in descent, within this particular ethnic group, which has, through both internal and external pressures, been somewhat forced in on itself in choice of mates for a very long time. It was your choice to invoke race in response to it, and it is hard to see why you did.

[Paschall]

88. Oh, I see I've created confusion

Actually I meant to forestall any anti-Semitic remarks regarding the Jewish "race." And unfortunately even the word "ethnic"--a very sloppy word, I might add--has certain "racial" connotations. (As you'll note, at least one poster mentioned a "Jewish gene.")

I guess that will teach me to keep my well-meant intentions to myself. :shrug:

(Aside from that, this particular new avenue of science interests me on its own merits.)

[The Magistrate]

89. Fair Enough, Sir

It is said that no good deed goes unpunished, and that most are more bitterly regreted than any sin.

It is a fascinating field of study, though it has reached maturity somewhat after my time. It seems most remarkable how few distinct lines there are: we seem all to be rather cozenish at bottom.

[Paschall]

90. Thank you for the absolution

This field is indeed fascinating. I have occasion to work with scientific texts written for popular audiences on this and other subjects, but my own scientific background is not particularly strong.

So in my limited way, I stick with the principle point of what I understand about these discoveries: "race" is meaningless, regardless what adjective we put before it (though I admit certain, more "ethnic" appellations have their usefulness, if only in providing vocabulary for constructing a self-identity).

[brainshrub]

50. I'd love to know the answer to that to.

If there is a "Jewish Gene" then that means asking for a Jewish state would be like asking for an Arian state. Is that so bad?

If there is no such thing a "Jewish Gene" then asking for a Jewish state is akin to a quazi-Theocracy. Is that so bad?

On the other hand, there is a French state. Is being French the same as being Jewish? Can you still consider yourself French if your family has been in Germany for 7 Generations? If you DON'T consider yourself German after 7 generations is that due to Germanys refusal to accept you, or something inherent to your French-ness?

This is an observation. I'm gonna ask the mods if I can make this a separate thread. This might be a bit to loaded.

[drewb]

51. Bit too loaded????

I'm gonna delete my own messages again as a pre-emptive strike...

Too loaded???

Is the Pope Catholic??? LOL!!!

[brainshrub]

52. LOL. Notice that no-one even wants to TOUCH this thread!

And for this room, that's saying a lot!

[Lurking Dem]

54. There are identifiable genetic similarities, yes.

http://www.freemaninstitute.com/Gallery/lemba.htm


But you ignored the fact that Sharon was born in Israel quite deftly.

[Paschall]

58. Sharon was born in Palestine

I'm not sure the presence of a certain genetic marker among a portion of the Lemba could be characterized as a genetic similarity "among Jews" (provided the Lemba are accepted as Jews, and with the proviso that this only refers to the Kohanim).

<snip> Most fascinating is the discovery that about half of the men in an Lemba elite family contain the same genetic marker on the Y chromosome as the one found in a study of Kohanim — male Jews who claim to be descended from the Jewish priestly line of Aaron, brother of Moses.

“The fact that we found this in such high concentrations in one of the Lemba subclans ... seemed finally to provide a really usable link between the Lemba and Jews,” Parfitt says in the documentary.

But make no mistake, the Lemba are definitely not one of the “lost tribes,” states Shaye J.D. Cohen, Ungerledier professor of Judaic studies at Brown University and a consultant on the program....

“There’s something romantic about this {the story of the Lost Tribes}, which is why it has never disappeared,” explains Cohen, author of the acclaimed new book “Beginnings of Jewishness.” “It’s very attractive and powerful, and it makes us feel good.”

But he quickly adds: “As a historian, I find the whole enterprise rather silly. Are the Lemba descendants of the lost tribes who disappeared from the face of the earth? The answer, of course, is no.”

But Cohen says that doesn’t mean the Lemba are not a kind of modern lost tribe — “a group of people unbeknownst to us and to themselves carrying Jewish genetic material.”

If the genetic testing is accurate, says Cohen, “then we have an interesting historical problem: How did Jewish genetic material wind up in the genes of the Lemba tribe? The obvious, plausible response is some Jewish adventurer got to this tribe and lived among them and sired sons with the native women. We have no idea when or where or how.” </snip>

http://www.thejewishweek.com/news/newscontent.php3?artid=1931

This is fascinating, but as far as I know Parfitt's research on the Lemba has never been validated. Got more info?

[Lurking Dem]

69. I answered above on the wrong post.

There are many studies showing "Jewish genetic material" including the one that disproved the Khazar nonsense.

I'm sure that the Jews who had Gestapo at their doors were saved by proclaiming they were "Polish" and not Semitic.

[Aidoneus]

53. not Polish

his parents were Russian immigrants, though.

[Paschall]

56. Russian extraction

Born in Kefar Saba or Kefar Malal, Palestine.

[rini]

64. LOL

David ben Gurien immigrated to the Turkish provence of Palestine, Sharon was born in the British Protectorate of Palestine. Your statement is as ridiculous as saying George Washington, Ben Franklin, Thomas Jefferson, etc were not Americans.

[Paschall]

67. Not ridiculous. Inaccurate

Washington, Franklin, and Jefferson were born British subjects. They became Americans when the country was established. A question of citizenship and nationality. Not "ethnicity."

The above poster is referring to Sharon's status as a member of the Semitic peoples, his Semitic ethnic origin or descent. While his remark is inaccurate, your comparison with the Founders is not apropos.

Though it is true, of course, that the individuals who call themselves Palestinians today are also "cousins" to Sharon as they also are members of the Semitic peoples.

[rini]

80. I am curious

why the emphasis on ethnicity, or semitic origins? I know I've heard it somewhere? Does is have to do with a liking of lamb, money, genetic features? Mmmmmmmmm can't remember where and when this so important an issue. Care to tweak my memory?

[Name removed]

82. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Lurking Dem]

83. Just when you think you've read everything......

oh my.

[Paschall]

86. As far as I'm concerned

This started primarily in response to a post way up there saying Sharon was "not Semitic, but Polish."

Pretty obvious I thought. Has nothing to do with (Paschal?) lamb or anything else you "pre-emptively" mentioned. So I think you can let your memory rest. No need for a tweak this time.

[Paschall]

91. Error

[foo_bar]

55. I love the postmodernism

Although Sharon's appeal to anti-anti-Semitism is very 20th century, it's really the anti-anti-anti-Semite card that's overplaying in Europe and other poststructuralist republics.

Without the unnecessary complexity, it seems there's 32,000 posts on the subject of I/P and 2,500 on all other conflicts combined. I'm sure it has nothing to do with Jews, but it's an intriguing disparity.

[BlackFrancis]

70. interesting observation

However I'd conjecture that somewhere in the early seventies was probably the rise of the anti-anti-anti-semite was the "new left" with Chomsky and his crew and their detractors from the "new republic" were probably the original anti-anti-anti-anti-semites.

Cockburn, Finkelstein, and their crew from today could be seen as the anti-anti-anti-anti-anti-anti-semites and the heirs of the "New Republic" (who historically have been on the wrong side of damn near every argument in the late twentieth century) would be the anti-anti-anti-anti-anti-anti-anti-semites ;-)