McCarthyism is generally accepted as an ideologically motivated practice of making accusations of disloyalty, subversion, or treason without proper regard for objective standards of the use of evidence. It also indicates exploiting reckless, unsubstantiated accusations, as well as demagogic attacks on the character or patriotism of political adversaries.
In my opinion, the following phrases would indicate a McCarthyite campaign:
1. 'The government of Israel is waging an aggressive campaign to suppress internal dissent'
2. 'they are motivated by a general disrespect for the role of civil society in a democracy'
3. 'who led the charge this past summer to suppress any group that dared to advocate'
4. 'This organization has now partnered with'
5. 'it threatens to put Israel in the same camp as Putin's Russia and other autocracies'
6. 'a Christian Zionist fund'
And who wrote them?
Didi Remez.
He is a communications consultant and claims to be proud to discover that he has been targeted by NGO Monitor although it seems this is a gross exaggeration. Remez blogs at
Coteret.com.
Those typical McCarthyite slogans are to be found here:
Bring on the transparencyRemez is upset.
Persons are zeroing in on the funding the many so-called non-governmental
amutot (NGOs) and what can only be referred to as politically-identified opposition groups in Israel originating from foreign governments and their agencies, semi-statist organizations and other political entities rather than your normal charitable donations from individuals. When a majority of funding comes from a foreign government, that would normally be considered illegitimate interference in the affairs-of-state of a sovereign and democratic country. I, for one, do not think it very democratic that one state is feeding the grassroots of another as long as there are elections, free press, transparency, independent courts, etc. Since Israel possesses all that and more, I can see where Remez is getting upset that some people might think him a 'subversive'. Oh, that's my right of free expression there, not my imaginary McCarthyism, Didi.
He accuses Ron Dermer of
"pass[ing] the ball to a political ally: Prof. Gerald Steinberg, president of NGO Monitor. This organization has now partnered with the Institute for Zionist Strategies, led by Israel Harel, a founder of the Gush Emunim settler movement."
and Steinberg's group, NGO Monitor,
is not an objective watchdog: It is a partisan operation that suppresses its perceived ideological adversaries through the sophisticated use of McCarthyite techniques - blacklisting, guilt by association and selective filtering of facts.
That is classic McCarthyism. It's guilt by association.
"Ally". "Partner".
That's character assassination.
Steinberg, for example, wrote this:
Jeremy Ben-Ami, J Street’s executive director, was the communications director for New Israel Fund (NIF). Ben-Ami is also the founder of the Israeli company Ben-Or Consulting (1998), which specializes in Strategic Communications and Consulting. Ben-Or works closely with many politicized Israeli NGOs, including Amnesty-Israel, Association for Civil Rights in Israel (ACRI), Bimkom, Keshev, Peres Center for Peace, Physicians for Human Rights – Israel (PHR-I), and Parents Circle. NGO funders NIF and the Ford Foundation are also Ben-Or clients.
If you go to Ben-Or's site, though, Jeremy isn't listed. Only at the
J Street site will you fine that Jeremy:
started the Israeli firm, Ben-Or Communications while living in Israel in the late 1990s
That's selective use of facts.
You'll notice, immediately, the main difference: Steinberg presents verifiable facts (and see
this on the issue at hand). Remez, well, he takes McCarthyite swipes.
Remez is upset about a meeting at the Knesset tomorrow.
"Israel's beleaguered human rights activists are bracing for yet another round of demonization and delegitimization",
he claims.
Breaking the Silence, a frequent subject of his organization's wrath, has financial reports for 2006-2008 posted on its Web site. NGO Monitor's site lists only one small U.S. charity as its current funder, providing no links for further information. The Institute for Zionist Strategies' site says nothing about its funding.
Remez thinks this "intellectual dishonesty". But the point is foreign governmental or quais-government funding. Does Remez truly think that Norway, Gt. Britain, Switzerland and, say, Holland are supporting the IZS? Or the NGO Monitor for that matter?
He puts it to his readers that there exists "Israeli government funding" of these groups and others like the Legal Forum for the Land of Israel, the Israel Law Center and Regavim. Isn't that a conspiracy theory? Isn't that another McCarthyite weapon?
He does note, correctly that Elad, for example, has been "cited by the Registrar of Associations for refusing to disclose its donor identities". Well, yes, but it is not doing so illegally - just as J Street has not disclosed its donors, only those of
its PAC-buddy.
He then, with all lack of decency, as Joseph N. Welch would perhaps have noted, claims that
One can understand their reticence [regarding transparency of funding]. What would the Israeli public say if the fact that Od Yosef Hai yeshiva, in Yitzhar, is the recipient of generous funding from the Israeli government had to be prominently displayed on the cover of its publications - which include "Baruch Hagever," an ode to Tomb of the Patriarchs killer Baruch Goldstein, and the "Handbook for the Killing of Gentiles"? How long would the U.S. taxpayer put up with the tax-exempt status of Shuva Israel, a Christian Zionist fund, if they knew that it supports the expansion of settlement outposts, illegal even under Israeli law?
First of all, the fact that Hesder Yeshivot receive government funding is well known and was prominently published recently after news reports on the "we refuse to remove" signs appeared. Second, the book "Baruch HaGever" was not connected to the Od Yosef Chai Yeshiva but with Michael Ben-Horin from the Golan. Third, there is no "Handbook" for the killing of Gentiles. The book "Torat HaMelech" actually enumerates the cases when non-Jews cannot be killed and is a Rabbinic Halachic tract, sort of like an academic review on Mein Kampf.
Remez also suggests that money from "U.S.tax exemptions, mostly hidden from public view, are the driving force of the settlement enterprise". But actually, they aren't. In order for that tax-exempt status to be achieved and maintained, the American IRS periodically reviews the propriety of the finances of groups supporting charitable enterprises as protected by US law.
And as for public view, if it weren't for his op-ed, I wouldn't have known about him although I have come across his blog.
----------
P.S.
See
my follow-up post on David Newman
Posts
