All Comments (37)

CPTNET

HEBRON: Tragedy in Beit Ummar pt II: Rest in peace?

by Doug Pritchard

2 Feb. 2008

On 1 Feb. 2008, Israeli authorities finally released the bodies of Mahmoud and Muhammed Sabarnah to the Palestine Red Crescent Society for
burial in their home community of Beit Ummar in the Hebron District. Israelis from the nearby settlement of Gush Etzion had killed the two
young cousins during a violent confrontation (see CPTnet article, Tragedy in Beit Ummar pt I: A closer look, 1 Feb. 2008.) Residents of
Beit Ummar now worried that the Israeli Defence Forces (IDF) would disrupt the men's funeral, just as they had repeatedly harassed and
attacked members of the community in recent months.

After noon prayers at the mosque, in memory of the two men, now called "martyrs," a funeral procession of 3,000 mourners began carrying the
bodies towards the cemetery. Six internationals, including CPTers Tarek Abuata and Doug Pritchard and four members of the International Solidarity Movement, positioned themselves almost at the front of the procession. As the procession came within sight of Route 60 and the
final approach to the cemetery, the IDF had closed a gate across the street. Before anyone reached the gate, and without any provocation or
warning, the IDF began firing on the procession, first with live ammunition, and then with plastic bullets, tear gas, and concussion
grenades. Three Palestinians were immediately injured near the internationals and taken away by ambulance as the outraged procession
retreated.

Some mourners hurriedly carried the bodies of the Sabarnah men along a back route to the cemetery, while others threw stones at the cement IDF
watchtower from which the firing had emerged. Another Palestinian fell and friends carried him away. In the cemetery, IDF soldiers arrived and
ordered the mourners to leave immediately. After a hasty burial prayer, the family and remaining mourners returned to the street. IDF jeeps then
began moving up the street, firing as they came. Palestinians fled into side streets. For the next three hours, IDF patrols spread through the
town, continuing to fire on small groups of retreating Palestinians, some of whom threw stones in return.

By the end of the afternoon 14 Palestinians had been wounded.

"Though Arun is a valued friend of many years with whom I have worked on bridging various divides, in this instance, I find myself in strong disagreement with him."

But disagreeing with him is one thing, and getting him fired quite another. Note that news of Arun Gandhi's resignation and the reasons for it have reached several large circulation Indian newspapers. If many Indian readers conclude, rightly or wrongly, that free speech exists in the US except when you criticize Israel, then this will not serve Israel and its friends very well.
The world is larger than just the US and Israel.

I think that Arun's comments were unreasonable and inaccurate - but he thinks that himself in hindsight. Why on earth engineer his resignation? There seems to be a kind of hypersensitivity afoot these days, like the hoopla about Obama "turning away" from Clinton.

Are we looking to create a society where everyone thinks ten times before speaking, and finally decides NOT to say what he or she thinks?

Why do you not address the part of the article that seems quite clearly to be the crux of Arun ji's writing: what means and measures are valid, particularly, just, and mutually acceptable means, of ensuring the freedom(s) of a community. As far as the preservation of an identity is concerned it seems that you are correct in saying that each community has "the right" to define...I think you meant defend if you are at all responding to Arun ji's article...but what agreed upon measures or means for defining and defending are being implemented is a question you have avoided with great stealth. So what if you are delighted to be part of an organization, you should have left that out, and said something about the message of the article to which you respond sir.

Why do you not address the part of the article that seems quite clearly to be the crux of Arun ji's writing: what means and measures are valid, particularly, just, and mutually acceptable means, of ensuring the freedom(s) of a community. As far as the preservation of an identity is concerned it seems that you are correct in saying that each community has "the right" to define...I think you meant defend if you are at all responding to Arun ji's article...but what agreed upon measures or means for defining and defending are being implemented is a question you have avoided with great stealth. So what if you are delighted to be part of an organization, you should have left that out, and said something about the message of the article to which you respond sir.

The Jewish People have survived for over three thousand years.

(The earliest reference to Israel is from the funery stela of the Egyptian Pharoah Merneptah, now in the Cairo Museum, which dates to 1209 B.C.)

All other empires that persecuted the Jews, from the Arameans to the Moabites, from the Babylonians to the Assyrians to the Selucids, from the Romans to the Spanish Inquisition to the Nazis to Communists, have fallen.

Yet the Jewish People are still here.

Yes, they are very tiny: there are only 13.2 million Jews in the world, compared to 1.7 Billion Muslims and 2 Billion Christians. However, I believe they will continue to survive.

Today, every Jew by birth that is alive is not only a descendent of the people of ancient Israel, but a descendent of those who survived great persecution and pressure to convert over countless centuries.

This is a great privilage and an incredible legacy.

Yet, today many Jews are ignorant of their own heritage, from the Hebrew Bible itself to the archaeology of Israel, from the Dead Sea Scrolls to the great works of the Rabbinic Era.

Thus, in this country and others they are intermarrying, turning away from the sacrifices of their ancestors and casting out this heritage.

Pressured by societies that still hold true to the ideas of Replacement Theology--the theology that the Church, or the Islamic Ummah, has replaced the Jewish People as G-d's choosen--they often want to assimilate into the maintstream.

Without the knowledge of their history, the Jewish People cannot understand the religious roots of Replacement Theology and how it evolved into anti-Judaism and then anti-Semitism.

They cannot understand how their tiny group can be so hated. After, all they were expelled by the Roman Empire and forced into millenia of Exile. Centuries of pogroms and explusion culminated in wholesale slaughter of gas chambers and mass graves that saw 1/3 of all Jews, including 2 million children, killed off in 4 years. Then final expulsion from the Arab world. Finally, a miraculous return to their ancestral homeland. Yet, no sympathy or support, only continual hatred.

They forget that Jesus was a Jew, as was Mary, Joseph, John the Baptist, Peter, Paul, all the Disciples, Isaiah, Jeremiah, all the Prophets, King David, Solomon, Jacob, Isaac, and Moses...

Thus, the Jewish People, simply, and tragically, internalize the word's hatred.

So, will they disappear over time?

No, it cannot be a coincidence that after 2,000 years of Exile the Jews have returned to their ancestral homeland to build a state, as it was predicted by Jeremiah and Isaiah.

Here is the future of the Jewish People, and as they have done for three millenium, they will--however small their numbers become--continue to survive and continue their ancestral legacy.

Interesting that no one's come at this question from the Israeli perspective. As a Jewish American who's spent years over there, I've got to say that most of the moral issues around Israel's decisions to occupy, invade, attack, or otherwise do anything militarily towards its neighbors is a subject of hot debate.

Israel has one of the freest presses in the world, and an unholy amount of opinions to fill the pages.

In my time there I've met with left-wing activists who want to go back to the '67 lines, some who even question the existence of the state itself.

I've met settlers in the West Bank who make passionate arguments about spilling their own blood for the land they're on.

I've met Muslim and Christian Israeli Arabs who've been there for centuries, but consider themselves citizens of the modern states.

I've met justifiably furious Palestinians from Nablus and Tulkarm. Believe it or not, the press in Israel covers them too.

I've met ultra-orthodox guys in black hats who are in Israel for revelation, and couldn't care less about zionism, save for letting them go to the wall and pray.

And I've met everyone in between; the people who were born and raised there and just want to make sure they still have a country in 20 years.

I think people there view the Holocaust as a critical mass for the creation of Israel, but Tel Aviv was already bustling in the '20s. Besides, half of all Israelis aren't even descended from Europeans, so it's an issue that you hear less of there than you might among New York Jews.

Israel's a completely new chapter in Jewish existence... the only place on earth where Yom Kippur is a national holiday. It's also intensely pluralistic, self criticising, and introspective. I encourage people to enter the debate giving these facts some consideration.

I feel that the people who claim lineage to biblical figures are insane. It is possible to not only believe a lie but convince others of that lie if that lie is perpetual. There is no proof that the people who profess to be Jewish related by blood to Abraham and Muslims who profess to be related by blood to Ishmael are anything more than confused people who after thousands of years of perpetual lies have gone insane in this belief.

The same goes for the land that these people are fighting over. After thousands of years of searching there is no proof that this land is the land where Jesus was born. Where is the proof? There are no skeletal remains of Jesus, Abraham etc. The only proof that we have been offered is manmade buildings and manmade artifacts.

The conflict between Muslims and Jews must be a never ending conflict because the very concept that they believe in and are willing to die for is based on an insane belief that they are direct descendents of God. God help them because that kind of insanity is untreatable.

The violence against each other by these two factions proves how far away from God these people are. God talked to man one time through Moses with the Ten Commandments. The Ten Commandments provided by God ORDERS man to not kill, to treat thy neighbor as thyself etc. These orders were cast in stone. Jesus, as the Son of God, which neither of these factions believes in, orders man to turn the other cheek and to respect your neighbor.

These people have fallen far away from God. They are insane and that insanity has spread to the rest of the world. END THE WAR IN IRAQ.

Yes, freedon, also for the people in Gaza, in the occupied West Bank.

Well I suppose we should be greatful to the Washington Post for posting an opposing view, eh? Wow, and by a non-Jew too.

The Arun post was disgusting and never should have passed any editor. I can only conclude that the Washington Post believes it is ok to hate Jews and is itself anti-semetic. Can you imagine similar columns that promulgate any other stereotype? "Blacks are lazy", "Christians are ignorant", "all Muslims are murderers", etc. Jews have always been convenient targets throughout history. Why don't you go all the way and just say whatever else is on your mind...Jews are the cause of 9-11, Jews are the money-changers and so are responsible for the recession, Jews will murder your children in their sleep....

I will mention only one thing here about why the Holocaust is more focused on the Jewish casualties than on the others: the explicit intent with regards to the Jews was genocide, a massive, mechanized attempt to wipe all Jews off the map. I am not doubting the loss of so many Slavs and other ethnicities during the war in concentration camps, and they should be remembered too, but what made the Holocaust a "Jewish" event was the outright attempt to immediately eliminate them all, on a scale unheard of. Jews may have been only 50% of the casualties, but considering that it was 1/3 of the World's Jewish population, this flagrant act of genocide should be remembered separately from the other acts of disparate violence, in the same way that we shouldn't forget Rwanda.

As for living in the past, well if remembering your past is living it, then we're all guilty. Also, people talk of 60 years as if it is forever, but while people with numbers tattooed on their arms still walk amongst us, how can we NOT remember?

January 9, 2008

NY Times Editorial

A Dangerous Game in the Strait

“Iran played a reckless and foolish game in the Strait of Hormuz this week that — except for American restraint — could have spun lethally out of control…”

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/01/09/opinion/09wed3.html?hp=&pagewanted=print

Why do we maintain from 1 to 3 Carrier Task Groups in the Arabian Gulf region?

Two main themes:

1. Our foolish dependence on Middle East oil.

2. Our foolish and unconditional support for the State of Israel.

If we had spent the last 5 years and $1 Trillion on development of alternate energy sources, instead of an unnecessary and ill advised preemptive invasion of Iraq, we would be well on our way to energy independence. We would not be in the Arabian Gulf threatening to start WW III.

If we had spent the last 60 years and hundreds of billions of dollars on development of alternate energy sources, instead of giving our unconditional support to the illegitimate “State of Israel”, we would be energy independent. We would not be in the Arabian Gulf threatening to start WW III.

I dispute that the Holocaust belongs to the Jews, as if being of another faith means it doesn't really touch me. That just reinforces that our ideas about the sacred come first, rather than the idea that a human being - each of us - is sacred, first and foremost. The Holocaust belongs to me, too, because people were tortured and killed in it. We should never forget that the basis for their selection was their religious/ethnic heritage, but to the extent that I am human, it should mean just as much to me. That goes for slavery or any other inhuman behavior or institution. Martin Luther King, for example, did not just help black people - he helped all of us, reaffirming our humanity. As I understand it, Gandhi didn't consider himself in a cause to help Indians, alone, but the British as well. We should never forget any of them. It has nothing to do with the guilt of a given ethnic group, race, or faith.

First of all, the Jews in the Bible take responsibility for killing Jesus, saying in Matthew 27:25 - "And all the people answered and said, 'His blood be on us and our children.'" They had tried to kill him numerous times on their own and when they couldn't, they had the Romans do it for them.

And when did the Israelites become slaves in Egypt? Pharoah took in Jacob's clan of sixty-six beggars as a favor to Joseph. He gave then the best land in Goshen in return for their work as herdsmen. When Jacob died the Egyptians gave him a state funeral and a royal procession to Canaan.

So after breeding like rabbits for over 300-400 years the Pharaoh decided to put them to work building two supply cities. They got mad and decided to loot Egypt. When they left they had stolen everything that the Egyptians owned.

So much for open borders and uncontrolled immigration. We should take a lesson from this story.

And whenever an Israelite/Hebrew/Jew got into trouble he would run and hide out in Egypt until things cooled off back home.

When the Moors invaded Spain in 711 they were helped by Jews. Jewish soldiers fought with the muslims against the Christians who were trying to regain Spain in 1431 during the Battle of Higueruela. Sure, the muslims slapped the Jews upside their heads periodically but they also used them as middlemen and collaborators. It's not wonder that the Spanish kicked them out with the muslims in 1492.

When the Zionists came up with their plan to take over the Holy Land they used every trick in the book. The British and others tried to get them to move to the island of Madagascar. They wouldn't have any of it. And there's always their role in aiding the commies taking over Russia. In the 20's and early 30's they were in a full push to create the Nazis and Hitler as their arch enemy and engaged in all sorts of propaganda and boycotts against them. They got the world going their way and Hitler started kicking them out of Germany.

Before the war was over people were running around yelling about fantastic numbers of Jews being killed. When they couldn't convince of their outrageous claims they hit upon the magic number of six million.

When the troops liberated the concentration camps they found bodies and walking skeletons. But there was also a lot of fatties. Somehow the few one body ovens used to incinderate diseased corpses were turned into the myth that millions had been gassed and burned. But then people will believe anything, including the idea that the Earth is only a few thousand years old.

So here we are today. Israel has about two acres of land and the Palies have two square yards. Israel has a couple of hundred nukes. The Iranians are working on getting a few. When they do they're going to blow the Israelies, Palies, Syrians, Jordanians, Lebanese, and a few Egyptians all to hell and the game will be over. Then we can go back to watching American Idol in peace.

I thought that Gaddy's piece was certainly better informed than that of Arun. Then again, that wouldn't be hard, given that Arun went off on an intolerant rant. Nevertheless, well written and certainly good in meaning.

Akus - "Er - Visitor - how much money has your government given to Egypt ($3B each year), Jordan, and Pakistan? Um ... Iraq ... Africa ..."

Yes, and I feel entitled to speak to events occurring in all of these regions, though you overestimate the figures for Egypt. Israel has received FAR more assistance both in terms of aid and loan guarantees than has been given to any other country.

"Adjusting the official aid to 2001 dollars in purchasing power, Israel has been given $240 billion since 1973, Stauffer reckons. In addition, the US has given Egypt $117 billion and Jordan $22 billion in foreign aid in return for signing peace treaties with Israel..." Christian Science Monitor

http://www.csmonitor.com/2002/1209/p16s01-wmgn.html

I'm not inclined to blame the Jews but I have no problem criticizing policies in Israel that exacerbate suffering in the region when I know that my tax dollars are being used to further those policies. And, as you're well aware, the aid given to Egypt has as much to do with stabilizing the region for the benefit of Israel than for any other purpose.

I'd be content if we granted foreign aid to Israel at the same per capita rate as is given to Rwanda. But you and I both know that will never happen. So my objection has to do with the distortion of American foreign policy that occurs specifically because of the pressure applied by American Jews. You'd rather not talk about Jews, but for some reason, Jews in this country seem intent on inserting themselves in the public arena for their own advantage. That deserves a response. The Pakistanis may be receiving assistance from this government, but it has nothing to do with the effectiveness of Pakistani Muslims in pressuring elected representatives. But then, you certainly know that...

Er - Visitor - how much money has your government given to Egypt ($3B each year), Jordan, and Pakistan? Um ... Iraq ... Africa ...

This isn't even about money - its about where the real violence in the world is, and who is committing it. And either blaming the Jews, or fantasizing, as Gandhi does, that Jews live only for and by violence, serves only to turn attention away from real problems.

"...The world should focus its attention on bigger problems - for example, a nuclear armed Pakistan falling into the hands of Moslem fundamentalists, next door to a nuclear armed India where the latest election in Gujurat was won by a Hindu running on an anti-Moslem platform, and where fighting over Kashmir for 60 years has probably caused more deaths than the Israel-Palestinian conflict."

I would be happy to ignore what is happening in Israel if my government would stop spending $3 billion each year supporting Israel while impounding monies intended for Palestinians because they voted for a party with whom this administration and its Israeli counterparts disagree.

Your comments are disingenuous for the simple reason that American Jewish supporters of Israel have no intention of giving up the political advantage they've cultivated for decades among elected officials who automatically genuflect when Israel asks for help. So long as elected officials are unable to "say no" I feel inclined to object both to what my government is doing and to what Israelis are doing with American tax dollars.

This, of course, has nothing to do with Jewish identity which is the subject of the forthcoming television show.

Jews putting guilt on Christians for the Holocaust just 65 years ago is disgusting but 2000 years of guilt put onto the Jews for the death of Jesus is fine. No wonder Jews feel they need to defend themselves against those who make plain their hate is eternal

Doubtless, it is difficult to separate the involvement of the American establishment in its support of Israel and the future of Judaism in this country. Jewish Americans who have so effectively motivated elected officials in this country to do their bidding are clearly committed to the security of what they call their "homeland." But what does that have to do with the future of Jewish identity in America?

I've little doubt that challenges faced by Israel will continue to be used to rally support among American Jews who may have no interest in living in Israel, but who are committed to the idea of a Jewish homeland. Perhaps commitment to the "tribe" is the best Jews can expect for the future, but there is an open question of whether that commitment can be sustained. Few Jews remain religiously active, unless a visit to a synagogue for the high holy days makes one religious. Jews are unique in the fact being a Jew is as much a cultural phenomenon as a religious one. I can't help but recall the last seder I attended when it was discovered we'd inadvertently flipped two pages of the Maxwell House published Haggadah rather than one. There was a bit of a chuckle, but an unexpressed agreement we could overlook those pages in the interest of finishing sooner. As a non-Jew I was disappointed and a bit shocked at the casual way the occasion was handled. Everyone wanted to be part of a seder, but no one seemed to take it seriously. Oh well...

Rituals of tribal membership are shared... the occasional Bris, the bar mitzvah, the seder, Yom Kippur, even celebration of a minor holiday, Hanukah, since it permits sharing of presents at the same time Christian brethren are sharing their Christmas presents. Yet as those few Jews who are observant wring their hands, intermarriage continues unabated and Jewish teens increasingly forego their visit to Israel following graduation in lieu of getting on with their lives in America. Fewer and fewer American Jews are committed to Jewish exceptionality, which can easily translate into diminished passion for the Jewish homeland. Perhaps they're comfortable with losing their identity as Jews as their identity as Americans becomes both secure and engaging. Jews who've lost their passion for Judaism quite naturally join other liberals in embracing assimilation and multi-culturalism. I married a Jewish woman but although she completed her bat mitzvah and later visited Israel, she is more interested in Buddhism than in Judaism. She has little interest in what is happening in Israel and if pressed would likely feel more sympathy with the Palestinians than with the Israeli Jews who use their military superiority to make life miserable for their neighbors.

Although I have little doubt that Jews inclined toward Zionism will continue to exercise their political muscle in this country, I expect assimilation will continue and Jewish identity will increasingly become marginalized in this country. For all the skin heads who are inclined to scrawl swastikas on synagogues and Jewish cemeteries, there are thousands of Americans who are disinclined to tolerate discrimination against anyone. One can be a Jew without risk of serious harm, but then who needs to embrace Jewishness when there are so many other possibilities to explore. I may have arrived on this planet as a Norwegian Lutheran, but neither of those identities hold ANY meaning for me at this point in my life. Personally, I find that fact liberating. I understand, of course, that for those still committed to either identification my disinterest is bewildering. What would happen if being a Jew held no meaning for a person born to that tradition? Perhaps we could all simply share this journey without regard to religious, national or cultural heritage. We can simply share our identities as human beings. I like that.

An excellent response to Gandhi's ignorant rant. Maybe it takes a non-Jew to give some perspective!!

I speak for many Jews, I believe, when I say that I wish the world would just leave us alone - this fascination with Jews, Jewishness, Judaism strikes me as a pathology.

It would be immediately apparent that having a Jewish writer put together a piece on the very obvious failings of India, and the revulsion any thinking person (which included Mahatma Gandhi) has for the caste system still rigorously enforced by Hindus, would be regarded as odd - what, after all, has it got to do with Jews, or Israel? But for some reason, the opposite is regarded as "normal".

As for the conflict between Israel and the Palestinians - a bad week there is like a good day anywhere Moslems are killing Moslems, or Darfur, Congo, etc. Its a sideshow, where more people in the immediate area are killed on the roads each week than in fighting. The world should focus its attention on bigger problems - for example, a nuclear armed Pakistan falling into the hands of Moslem fundamentalists, next door to a nuclear armed India where the latest election in Gujurat was won by a Hindu running on an anti-Moslem platform, and where fighting over Kashmir for 60 years has probably caused more deaths than the Israel-Palestinian conflict.

I think Israel should bomb fvck-all out of Arabia. Toss a nuke on Pakistan or Iran. Then slaughter, say, 6 million Palestinians. Then all of these critics would really have something to criticize. It's not like Israel's PR could get any worse. And besides, the world would secretly be overjoyed to be rid of the endless useless violence of the Fundamentalist Muslims.

"I find it interesting that those defending the indefensible"

Taking land in a war is "indefensible"? Somebody better tell all of the leaders of every nation in the world. Name one point in history when it wasn't commonplace to seize land during a war.

In my book, if you start a war against a country, and lose, and they take land from you...sucks to be you. Next time, don't lose. Even better, don't start the war.

I find it interesting that those defending the indefensible always start and end by saying that no good can come by looking back, we must look ahead.

Let's not forget that the "land-grabbing" you're referring to happened AFTER Israel was attacked by all of its Arab neighbors (Lebanon, Syria, Jordan, Iraq, and Egypt)... in 1948, 1956, 1967, and 1973. Israel won all of those wars, and gained land in the process, something that a lot of countries do (think Texas and remember the Alamo).

Personally, I blame the Brits. In the 19th and early 20th centuries, they ran all over the place with their "world domination" mentality and interjected themselves into cultures they didn't understand and never learned. Then, when things got tough, they moved out. They drew a line in the sand (literally in this case) along the Jordan River, said "East of the Jordan in for Muslims, West is for Jews... we're outta here!"

In fact, they did the same thing when they left the Pakistan / India region. Israel and Palestine battle over the West Bank, Pakistan and India battle over Kashmir, and I think Great Britain's mismanagement is largely to blame for the whole mess. During the year after GBR pulled out of the area, more than half a million Arabs left Israel during the war. The Israeli Government extended an invitation for citizenship with full rights, but most of then refused, settling into refugee camps, and expecting Jordan and other Arab countries to take them in. When that didn't happen, refugee camps turned into tent cities, and these people and their decedents are still living in no-man's-land today. Israel's biggest mistake was in letting them remain there for so long without any infrastructure. Pessimism and hatred grew into violence and terrorism.

Its an awful situation, with lots of blame to be served 'round, but pointing fingers and looking backward isn't going to solve the problem ahead, is it?

While the Jews may have been identified victims by their religion; in fact they do not constitute the majority of those killed during this grim episode! So many were killed for their nationalities, whether Poles, Russians, Slavic or Arabs; there was endless injustice and the axis side was only marginally better in some cases.

There is no justifiable basis to support the land grabbing subjugation of the peoples who lived in the lands now known as Palestine. To use some self-serving hoary legend as a basis is just plain wrong. Supporting Zionist expansion is not a Christian act; supporting Zionist ambitions is not a Christian act; supporting the Zionist apartheid is to make the Christian community not dissimilar from the Europeans who ignored the Nazi holocaust that began this mess!

I think in America, it's important to remember that this isn't about 'picking sides' based on religion. I've lived places where I really did, for practical reasons, feel I needed a weapon.

Especially politically, but in any situation, there is a difference between *having* a weapon and *thinking* with it. And this is something I really think gets lost in these policy questions, and particularly when saying it's really about Judaism.

william you give yourself too much credit buddy

I have no stake in the question of future Jewish identity, and Rev. Gaddy did a pretty enlightened job of discussing some issues, but one thing that will happen in the coming generation is that a lot of pent-up anger among non-Jews at the manner in which the US government has allowed America to become an unquestioning tool of the policies of the state of Israel will be released in the political sphere; American Jews who identify with Judaism and Zionism will have to acknowledge the moral outrage at Israel's policies and work to change them, or else continue to try to suppress discussion and risk becoming objects of a new type of antisemitism based on being proxies for Israel. If you don't understand that there is pent-up anger at Israel, if you've bought in to the whole justification of land seizures and branding of the Palestinians as subhuman terrorists, then the future will be painful...

And, for the record, I think Israel needs to be well-armed. I'm just *damn* sure it won't *solve* anything.

" Take a closer look at your friends:

"Behind most liberals -- especially Black and European -- lies an anti-semite. Israel, they believe, is the incarnation of evil. No mention of the the hundreds of thousands to millions slaughtered in their own countries in recent times. No mention of Israel's ongoing struggle to survive. Just that Israel -- and the Jews -- are the world's "Biggest Player" in violence."

Nonsense. There's just a cognizance that the Religious Right here supports the right-wing religious parties in Israel, often because they believe that the Israeli state is necessary for Jesus to come back, have the ground eat the non-Christians, and end the world.

Not really what I'd call basis to call non-supporters of right-wing Israeli governments 'anti-Semites.'

Just like they say it's 'anti-Christian' to oppose people warmongering in the name of Christianity.

It's not that.

Believe it or not, there's more to what's right, or just, or smart for a government to do than what religious book they wave to justify it.

I don't think it's liberals that have a problem with that distinction. Certainly plenty of American Jews can make it.

Dear Blind Leading the Blind,

Yes, having a dissenting, informed opinion is a real inconvenience, isn't it? You and Dick Cheney should go duck hunting one of these days.

Then again, I suppose your online signature says it all.

Best Wishes

Punch counter punch between two people who know so little about Jews and Judaism. Followed by comments from mostly ignorant people. It's pathetic.

Punch counter punch between two people who know so little about Jews and Judaism. Followed by comments from mostly ignorant people. It's pathetic.

I totally disagree with Mr. Gaddy. I'm a Jew, and I know for a fact that my own people like to drown gentiles with "The Jewish Guilt." The Holocaust was horrible, and it saddens me to think of what must have happened at that time, but aren't we mature enough to have grown past it, already? Do we have the same kind of sentiment for those massacred in Cambodia under Pol Pot? Or those in Darfur? Frankly, it seems hypocritically, racially bigoted to care more about European Jews from over 60 years ago at the expense of Asians and black Africans. It is no secret that what academics have described as the "Pro-Israel Lobby" is partially responsible for the continuation of hostilities in the Middle East, to say nothing of their perpetually unstable Arab neighbors. Sorry, but Israel can no longer be permitted to guide American geopolitical policy using the Holocaust as a convenient excuse. Like Rudy "noun-verb-9/11" Giuliani, Jews today can ill-afford to be ghoulish opportunists.

Behind most liberals -- especially Black and European -- lies an anti-semite. Israel, they believe, is the incarnation of evil. No mention of the the hundreds of thousands to millions slaughtered in their own countries in recent times. No mention of Israel's ongoing struggle to survive. Just that Israel -- and the Jews -- are the world's "Biggest Player" in violence.

That fallacy falls on its face. Just look at the numbers. Now look at the people saying this. What is their agenda?

Then step away from them. They would have lambs lay down with lions. Despite the fact that lions have eaten lambs for ten thousand years. People who advice you to walk peacefully into your own slaughter are not your friends. They are your enemies in disguise.

ARUN GHANDI IS A DISGRACE TO HIS GRANDFATHER

I hope you put it to him plainly the next time you talk in person. Jews, conservatives, and independents will shrink from his cause, his platform, and his nonsense.

Why again, is the future of Judaism NOT bright?

I can't help but take great offense to Mr. Gaddy's perception that "The Future of Jewish Identity is not Bleak". The Jewish Museum is in New York, a place where half the population is Jewish. You would be hard pressed to find a similar museum being erected in Idaho or Kansas or Nebraska or North Dakota or Alabama.
As a secular Jew I feel that organized religion is, in fact, the reason that so much blood has been shed through the centuries. But to say that the future of Judaism is bright is, at this time, a naive statement.