The following was sent to the Forward as an op-ed submission on March 24.
On April 8, due to my previous misunderstanding, I agreed to have it appear as a letter.
I checked today and my letter wasn't there. Another from April 16th was, however.
It may as yet still appear.
In the meantime, here it is:
Reading yet another Peter Beinart attack on AIPAC (“AIPAC IsPlaying The Victim, But It’s Palestinians Who Are Being Silenced”, March 26) as
part of his decade-long assault on American Jewish Establishment institutions
and influence, playing on one of his frequent themes that somehow the victims
of an enforced campaign of silencing are the Arabs of the former British
Mandate territory of Palestine who are still, after they have numerous times
rejected diplomatic solutions for more than nine decades, seeking their state,
I was first taken aback by his defense of Minnesota representative Ilhan Omar.
Her anti-Jewish agenda, expressed through many statements going
back years, is clear. As is said, even for a “goyisheh kop” her sentiments are
obvious. Money, hypnotism, etc. For Beinart, however, “Omar, has suggested,
flippantly, that AIPAC wields power because its supporters give politicians
money”. It was a joke. It was her sense of humor. If it weren’t so unfunny, I’d
compare that remark to Hamas’ mistakes in consistently firing missiles from
Gaza deep into Israel. But I realized that for Beinart, his success depends on
how outlandish he can stretch his logic so that instead of disturbing people
who actually think, he wows them with the most extreme convoluted
possibilities.
By the way, Omar insinuated that AIPAC directly gives money,
“Benjamins”, but why should Beinart need to feel he must be exact in his
assertions. Many of his other assertions and ideological interpretations are
also just enough inexact as to allow him to hypnotize, sorry, bewitch a younger
generation of American Jews.
Beinart’s next step in this piece is to identify AIPAC with the
“Right”. He does that writing “AIPAC also wields power because of a strong
cultural, ideological and religious affinity for Israel, particularly on the
right.” Why “particularly”? Hasn’t AIPAC been a power no matter what Israeli
government has been in power? Hasn’t AIPAC been a power no matter who is on its
governing bodies?
But Beinart is on a silencing campaign of his own and there is
nothing better than to accuse someone or something of the exact sin in which
you yourself are engaged in yourself. He is well aware of that maneuver.
He continues to silence Omar’s troping of anti-Semitic similes. Omar’s
“push for allegiance to a foreign country” in relation to AIPAC and other
Jewish groups “is simplistic and misleading”.
Note: Omar is not simplistic; her words are. And I would add that her
intent wasn’t at all simplistic.
Beinart finally turns his rabid rhetoric on AIPAC which “is not
victim but victimizer”. Why? It seeks to push the legislation of the Combatting
BDS Act. As proof that that would be bad, Beinart avoids all legal opinions
supporting the law and cherry-picks that of the American Civil Liberties Union.
Why is their opinion better than any other in support of the law we do not
know.
He attacks the Anti-Semitism Awareness Act and in doing so
ridiculously suggests that “a student who called for transforming Israel from a
Jewish state into a secular state with equal rights for all would be guilty of
bigotry”. Firstly, Israel is secular albeit with a strong Jewish
character. That was the whole idea of
Zionism as the Jewish national movement. It is worth pointing out that the
United Nations recommended already in 1947 that a Jewish state be established
within a portion of the original Mandate for Palestine territory. That territory,
Beinart perhaps need reminding, was to become the Jewish national home due to
its historical connection to the Jewish people and not just a state of its
residents.
He continues and turns the most outstanding negative
characteristic of the Arabs of the former Palestine Mandate, their self-imposed
victimhood-for-sympathy and writes of the pro-Israel community that it acts as
it does “because permanent victimhood creates moral license”.
He pooh-poohs Israel “as perennially facing existential threat”
as if it doesn’t. His proof? In 1993 the PLO “recognized Israel’s existence”.
That recognition was hollow as it sought to define Israel as not an expression
of Jewish national identity. He trumpets that “Israel is the sole Middle
Eastern nation with nuclear weapons” which may be true but that is only because
Iran is not in the Middle East and a nuclear reactor in Syria, which is quite
non-peaceful towards Israel, was destroyed. He is quite upset that Israel dares
to claim any “moral responsibility” or that it faces “an existential threat”
for in doing so, “then anything Israel does to defend itself is legitimate” as
if Israel constrains itself more than any other country under similar acts of
aggression whose sole aim is to kill and maim civilians whether by rockets,
car-rammings, suicide-bombing or kite and balloon bombs.
He then launches his own explosive charge in comparing AIPAC to
Israel’s defense measures, using the same words: “then why shouldn’t AIPAC use
any means necessary to protect itself”, as if AIPAC employs lethal weapons.
Beinart challenges AIPAC to “confront the moral responsibilities of Jewish power”. He,
conveniently, ignores the obverse element in his argument: will he come to an
Israel which divests itself of power and live here during the horrific events
that will surely follow?
_______________________
Email exchange:
Op-ed submission
Yisrael Medad
Attachments
Tue, Mar 26, 11:58 PM
Wed, Mar 27, 6:26 PM
to me
thanks, will post as a letter to the editor
--
Batya Ungar-Sargon
Opinion Editor
Forward.com
Yisrael Medad
Wed, Mar 27, 6:32 PM
to Batya
Thank you.
Yisrael Medad
Fri, Mar 29, 8:21 AM
to Batya
it will eventually appear here?
https://forward.com/opinion/letters/
Batya Ungar Sargon
Fri, Mar 29, 6:57 PM
to me
yes, edit below:
Yisrael Medad
Apr 5, 2019, 2:22 PM
to Batya
Too bad that the last update in the Letters Section is March 14 as of 10 seconds ago.
Batya Ungar Sargon
Apr 5, 2019, 4:25 PM
why too bad? I sent you an edit - just waiting on your ok... is that not clear?
Yisrael Medad
Fri, Apr 5, 4:37 PM
to Batya
Sorry.
I understood you as simply showing me.
As it you defined it as a letter, I didn't think you were requiring my approval.
It's fine.
Appreciated.
Yisrael Medad
Apr 8, 2019, 10:48 PM
to Batya
Repeat: okay.
Email exchange:
Op-ed submission
Yisrael Medad
Attachments
Tue, Mar 26, 11:58 PM
Wed, Mar 27, 6:26 PM
to me
thanks, will post as a letter to the editor
--
Batya Ungar-Sargon
Opinion Editor
Forward.com
Yisrael Medad
Wed, Mar 27, 6:32 PM
to Batya
Thank you.
Yisrael Medad
Fri, Mar 29, 8:21 AM
to Batya
it will eventually appear here?
https://forward.com/opinion/letters/
Batya Ungar Sargon
Fri, Mar 29, 6:57 PM
to me
yes, edit below:
Yisrael Medad
Apr 5, 2019, 2:22 PM
to Batya
Too bad that the last update in the Letters Section is March 14 as of 10 seconds ago.
Batya Ungar Sargon
Apr 5, 2019, 4:25 PM
why too bad? I sent you an edit - just waiting on your ok... is that not clear?
Yisrael Medad
Fri, Apr 5, 4:37 PM
to Batya
Sorry.
I understood you as simply showing me.
As it you defined it as a letter, I didn't think you were requiring my approval.
It's fine.
Appreciated.
Yisrael Medad
Apr 8, 2019, 10:48 PM
to Batya
Repeat: okay.
^
1 comment:
Re Peter Beinart op-ed and Haaretz saying July-14-2020 he doesn't go far enough.
It's a club where whoever screams louder the A. slur, thinks is more special.
Don't be fooled by phrasing it as suggestions. The term "liberal Zionists" has become more and more of an empty title.
What all these "thinkers" won't divulge, is pragmatism. Since it doesn't make bumber-stickers. Or headline grabbing.
There are many Israelis, not only ultra orthoox , who are--ready for this cliche?--concerned about life, survival. And don't put much thought or concerned into Zionism as ideology.
This is not to say they deny historic ties to the land.
Do these writers deny legitimate worry of entities (moderate or radical Arab Palestine) that incite for, justify even glorify killing of Jews in Israel? Are they totally blind to genocidal Islamic Republic that doesn't even share any border, yet has its bloody hands full at the border and inside Israel?
Want real pragmatic suggestions?
Begin reforming 'Palestinian' education, as a start.
Post a Comment