As for the main hit on me - "Medad and Gordis’s claim that they will become more compliant if Israel eats away more of their future state is so absurd. One might even say that by claiming they support the two state solution while supporting policies that drive nails in its coffin, Medad and Gordis are playing us for suckers.", - while I cannot speak for Daniel, I, for one, don't think I expressed an unreserved support for the Two State Solution. In fact, I have expressed support for the Three State Solution which, of course, demands that the territory of Jordan must be included in the land mass to be re-subdivided (not that partition ever worked or ever will). While I am not a progressive liberal - although I have bled in my lifetime - I do think myself a liberal democrat and one who desires fairness.
It is grossly unfair for the territory of the former original Mandate for Palestine, which included TransJordan (see 1919 Versailles Peace Conference; 1920 San Remo Conference; and the 1922 League of Nations decision), to evolve into three states, two of which are Arab which ban Jews owning property or residing in them - apartheid, by the way - or perhaps even three Arabs states: Jordan, a kingdom of sorts, whose first monarch basically fled Saudi Arabia in 1920 to come assist rethrone his brother over Syria but ended up getting a Emirate from Winston Churchill while the brother was transferred to Iraq; Hamastan in Gaza and Fatahland in Judea and Samaria and one is Israel which must permit Arabs to reside therein (in "settlements"?), not pay full taxes, not serve in the Army or even a National Service program - all of which may contribute to the unjust, yes, discrimination they suffer, not to speak of Nakba Day festivities, rampant support for subversive Islamist elements, some stone throwing, et al.
And I certainly am upset that a Professor of Journalism would misquote me and thereby mispresent me in writing:
Yisrael Medad took a shot: He called Dershowitz a “freyer” or sucker. “Would you play chess in that fashion? Gamble even?” Medad asked.
What I did write about Dershowitz's suggestion was in terms of
...naive and even irrational. And not clever at all...To be generous, this is fairly amusing and at the same time, disappointing. One would have presumed a true defender of Israel to be more imaginative and, at the same time, more cognizant of the political realities of the conflict.
I think that's clear and English-understandable enough to be fathomed by a former editor of The New Republic and stands on its own as a political criticism of a bad idea.
I hope to take this up with Beinart next week. In person. In Jerusalem.
____________
Just now saw this from yesterday at the State Dept. briefing:
QUESTION: Yeah. Can we talk about --
MR. TONER: Yeah.
QUESTION: -- the Palestinian issue?
MR. TONER: Sure.
QUESTION: Today, one of the staunchest supporters of the Likud, Alan Dershowitz, a great legal mind, American legal mind, suggested that settlements ought to be frozen while talks are ongoing. Would you support such a proposition?
MR. TONER: Again, I think our focus remains on getting both sides back to the negotiating table as soon as possible. Again, we had this exchange of letters that was very positive.
QUESTION: Right.
MR. TONER: We want to see this back, but in terms of that specific proposal, what’s important for us is that both sides get back to the negotiating table where they can discuss all of these issues.
So, they really agree with Dershowitz either.
^
Posts
3 comments:
The most pressing point which Beinart continues to fail to comprehend is that American Jewish youth - as a demographic - needs Israel so, so much more than Israel needs them. They need to find a way to love Israel as she forges a path to security and independence. We need do NOTHING to please them, or appease their liberal, non-Jewish, misguided views. If you don't like the Talmud, you haven't studied it enough, struggled with it enough. That's the approach of a person with faith. If you don't understand how Israel's policies are democratic it means YOU haven't done your homework. It doesn't make Israel wrong. I just can't wait for a chance to tell Beinart directly.
Jordan may be problematic:
Israeli tourists with skullcaps assaulted in Jordan market
Mens’ Jewish headgear ‘provoked the sensibilities of the vendors,’ Jordanian
daily reports
By Elhanan Miller The Times of Israel June 5, 2012, 4:07 pm12
http://www.timesofisrael.com/israeli-tourists-assaulted-in-jordan-market/
Six Israeli tourists were assaulted Monday in a market in southern Jordan,
local media reported, after vendors were angered by their traditional Jewish
skullcaps.
The six men and women arrived at a market in the town of Rabba, 100
kilometers (62 miles) south of the capital Amman, when one of the vendors
identified the tourists as Israeli due to mens’ skullcaps, which “provoked
the sensibilities of the vendors,” independent daily Al-Arab Al-Yawm
reported.
The vendor proceeded to assault the men with shoes, a symbol of disdain in
Arab culture. The Israeli tourists fled the area in their cars as buyers
joined the attack, the daily reported.
No information was reported on their condition or if they remained in
Jordan.
“Israelis are not wanted in the market,” a shopper told Al-Arab Al-Yawm.
“Those who talk about peace between Israelis and Jordanians are delusional.
The signed agreements are nothing but ink on paper. They are meaningless.”
Dersh was always a willing strawman. He was a Chomsky's camper and we should be careful of allowing our enemies to claim he represents any position of security.
Post a Comment