When families fight….
Currently, there is a debate in Israel about the foreign funding of NGO’s. It’s vociferous and brass in a kind of take no prisoners public free for all. This inspires Dr. Dawg with a longing and he admits to the desire to live in an alternative reality wherein he is an Israeli. I have my own Israeli alternative reality where I live in the Golan Heights on a moshav growing grapes and honey. I also get to paint outside in the afternoon sun. Of course, if we did live in our alternative realities – he would be doing his damnedest to have me evicted from my home…but not only would I be fighting tooth, nail and kippots every step of the way; I would still make better cholent.
I thought I would run a follow-up to illustrate one of the examples Dawg used in his post. Ha’aretz ran an article suggesting the Jerusalem Post ’summarily’ fired Prof. Naomi Chazen from their roster of columnists as a kind of pay-back for also being the president of the New Israel Fund whose agenda and sources of foreign funding have recently come under a great deal of criticism. Ha’aretz
Associates of Prof. Naomi Chazan attacked the Jerusalem Post on Saturday in the wake of the English-language daily’s decision to fire the former Meretz MK who is at the center of a right-wing campaign against the New Israel Fund, of which Chazan is president. “The issue now is freedom of speech and freedom of expression,” a source told Haaretz last night. “The paper took a stand against freedom of expression and Prof. Chazan regrets this to the depths of her soul.”
Except, well nothing is as it seems – including ‘freedom of speech and expression’. The Jerusalem Post terminated Prof. Chazen from their roster due to the fact their policy of not employing columnists who sue their employers in the name of ‘free speech and expression’. Personally, it sounds like a no-brainer editorial decision on the Jerusalem Post’s part but I will quote the Jpost and let everyone make up their own mind.
The Jerusalem Post has canceled Naomi Chazan’s biweekly column, after she and the New Israel Fund of which she is president threatened legal action against the paper over a recent advertisement.The decision was taken by Jerusalem Post management after a legal threat was received at the paper from the NIF and Chazan’s lawyers.
Along with other publications, the Post last Sunday carried an advertisement criticizing Chazan and the New Israel Fund in the context of the Goldstone Report on Operation Cast Lead.
In Friday’s paper, the Post carried an advertisement defending the NIF and Chazan against their critics.
Of course, in my alternative reality I might also be one of Ha’aretz’s litigators part-time so my source of income would remain fluid at all times. No doubt the law firm which handles Ha’aretz’s lawsuits thinks of the newspaper as their own brand of ‘annuity’ client.
Well, I didn’t dwell on the firing, partly because it seemed to run contrary to the nature of all the debate that was going on. And the cancellation of the Aussie trip seemed to have many causes.
If matters are as you state, Chazan should have taken a leave of absence until things were sorted out. She seems to have found herself in a conflict of interest.
All this ferment reminds me of that story Amos Oz tells in In the Land of Israel, where he’s set upon by some Likudniks (?) in a cafe. But they don’t slap him around or call him names. They sit him down and ply him with coffee and cigarettes for hours and argue with him.
Always enjoyed that.
Your IDS(*) is a big bore, Dawg. Monotonous and risible. You have nothing to say about the Middle East – indeed, about almost anywhere beyond North America – except endless riffs on the nefariousness of Israel and, especially, anyone in Canada who would come to its defence. In this context, and, especially, the depths you recently reached in “Truth is a Defence”, your new “some-of-my-best-friends-are-Israelis” campaign is a tasteless joke. No one is laughing.
Well Prof. Chazen is certainly dwelling on it but more importantly I take it you want to be woo’d. I made a simple comment about it being family, and perhaps because of the frivolousness of it, my point was lost. Oz is woo’d not because he’s an important Israeli writer or because of his politics but because he’s part and parcel of Yiddishkeit living in the Jewish homeland. Your an outsider, and the weight of history teaches Jews outsiders are those Yiddishkeit needs to instinctively wary of – if Jew are to protect what they value the most. Its like that old joke about a wife who calls her husband and ass but takes offense when someone else does it. The husband might be an ass, but he’s her ass. Regardless of Oz’s beliefs and the consequences of his ‘beliefs’; he is in the same boat as the Lidduniks and shares their fate. You on the other hand can walk away and say, ‘oh well and so it goes’ and wash your hands of it all.
Hal, Dawg is a decent person, and is often motivated by his personal sense of what is humane and just. While I often spar and cross keyboards with Dawg and believe he is flat-out wrong on many things, I would still rather engage him than not. At least he is willing to listen – even if he doesn’t agree in the end. Its far too easy to walk away and throw our hands up in the air but what have we accomplished at the end of the day?
Kate,
From my occasional looks in his blog, I’d say that I share many of his positions – on the Tories, on climate, on the economy, etc. But his virulent anti-Israelism seems to colour even these topics. His is symptomatic of a purblind “anti-imperialism” that will go to the ends of the earth to defend dodgy characters and organizations (they view Islamism as some sort of progressive movement!) but can only generate snark and contempt when Jews see antisemitism making a frightening comeback in certain quarters under the guise of “anti-Zionism”. My wife, who was born Jewish but never had any religion, is far more leftwing than I am, and she tells me that the overt antisemitism in her circles is beginning to alarm her. But, of course, for Dawg and his ilk, that’s just Jews deliberately exaggerating to cover up Israeli “crimes”! You’re welcome to Dawg, Kate. After his “Truth is a Defence” post (I nearly vomited when I read it, but I was too angry to comment; in fact that’s why I’ve avoided commenting on his blog altogether), it’ll be a long time before I can see his “decency”.
Our problem here with that story is that the flaming on both sides of the debate reached the extremes of human behavior. It’s already beyond name calling and in some cases borders on incitement to violence.
I can clearly see where Dr. Dawg enjoyment comes from, I am afraid, Kate, that you are being too kind in this case. But alas, blogger wars are the stupidest kind.
Kateland, I don’t think I missed your point at all–check out the title of my post!
Thanks for the kind words, by the way. I think my main point–the ability to have a full-on debate unencumbered by accusatory ad hominems being more likely in Israel than here in Canada–is made by commenters like Hal. It’s always assumed that we aren’t arguing in good faith, so we never actually get to the debate per se. That goes for Canadian Jews and non-Jews alike who are critical of the government of Israel. Our arguments are never taken at face value–we must have some ulterior motive. It’s a waste of time even talking to people who carry on like that.
If I may return the favour, you are not one of those people. Tough, uncompromising, letting me have it from time to time, sure–but you at least do me the honour of taking my words for what they are rather than hunting for motives.
I did indeed find myself quite envious reading about the latest controversy. I’ve been an Oz fan for decades, by the way–don’t always agree with him, but he humanizes a space too often inhabited by cartoonish rage-aholics.
Dawg: “Our arguments are never taken at face value–we must have some ulterior motive.”
Precisely. To quote from my previous comment: “My wife (…) tells me that the overt antisemitism in her circles is beginning to alarm her. But, of course, for Dawg and his ilk, that’s just Jews deliberately exaggerating to cover up Israeli ‘crimes’!”
A (secular, leftwing) Jew worried about antisemitism? Oh it’s just a “specious charge (that) is regularly used against those of us who dare to be critical of the state of Israel”.
http://drdawgsblawg.blogspot.com/2008/11/fox-news-anti-semite-is-honoured-guest.html
This is “decency” I can do without, Kate.
My wife reads a blog called Shiraz Socialist, where she just noticed a post that makes my very point. (It’s good to see that not all leftwingers have hitched their wagons to theocratic “anti-imperialism”.)
Quoting Barbara Ellen in The Observer… “(’They’re constantly harping on about being victimised’), as well as the spurious feeling that: ‘They can look after themselves – aren’t they all rich and powerful and best mates with Stephen Spielberg?’”
(Or Dawg’s simplified version: “specious charge”… “ulterior motive”… “Israel”.)
Read it all (as they say)…
http://shirazsocialist.wordpress.com/2010/02/09/zionism-anti-semitism-ex-public-schoolboys-and-the-left/
How very odd. The link that Hal cites is one in which I denounce anti-Semitism. Classic, right-wing, unvarnished anti-Semitism. Perhaps the real thing puts criticism of Israel into proper perspective.
Anyway, here’s Jonathan Kay on the subject. Anti-Semite or self-hater? You decide.
Thanks for the space, Kate, but dishonest, smarmy defamers like Hal don’t exactly make it welcoming. Yet that’s mostly what we get in this country, and I’m grateful to the Hals for proving my point, again and again and again. Those fantasies of my alternate life as an Israeli do appeal…
Unfortunately for Dr.Dawg, the “classic, right-wing, unvarnished anti-Semitism” that he loves to hate is now far outpaced by (or has it simply merged with?) the (varnished?) leftwing antisemitism — oops, “anti-Zionism” — that Shiraz Socialist so adroitly highlights. I’d like to think that this is only a blind spot, but the neverending series of anti-Israel posts (coupled with regular sniping at mainstream Jewish-Canadian organizations) leaves a foul taste in this observer’s mouth than no amount of Oz compliments will dispel. I would refer Dawg to Luke 4:23, but, then, he’s no real doctor, is he?
And while we’re on the subject, why is it that nearly all of the people that our “doctor” defends (Diab, Khadr, etc.) are of a particular political ilk. An Indian-Canadian held hostage in Saudi Arabia? http://www.thenation.com/doc/20100208/pollitt Nah, no mention. An Iranian-Canadian imprisoned and beaten in Iran? http://www.cbc.ca/world/story/2009/11/22/bahari-interview.html Nah, no mention. (And while we’re on the subject of Iran, what about the thousands of dissidents imprisoned, tortured, raped, executed? http://www.nytimes.com/2010/02/10/world/middleeast/10arrests.html Nah, not worthy of mention. Dawg’s too busy with that other middle-eastern country beginning with the letter “I”, the one that’s the real pariah among nations.) Notice a pattern?
regular sniping at mainstream Jewish-Canadian organizations
Yes, this “Official Jew,” “house Jew,” “no joy in Jewville” stuff will have to stop.
Wait a minute! That wasn’t me! It was Ezra Levant!
Anti-Semite or self-hater? You decide.
(No word as yet on Jonathan Kay, but Hal’s purpose here is to slime, not to argue.)
Hal, interesting blog, and I read the post but forgive me because while I can accept the fact that incidents of anti-semitism in the last year has increased dramatically in Britain; its hard for me to forget the long historical and cultural association with anti-semitism that Brits from all sides of the poltical spectrum indulge in. It makes surreal reading for me. Anyway, I was following along well enough until “The abstract domination of capitalism is personified by Jews. And immediately thought why do ethnic Christians always associate Jews with ‘Shylock’ and ‘Fagin’ rather than say our King David whose shield is part of the Israeli flag and a man who was monarch-warrior-sheppard-musician and poet and continues to inspire untold thousands of Jews?
Maybe its just the circles I travel in but I have met far more potential Davids than Fagins. Moving along and I quote ‘This approach might also explain the spread of anti-semitism in the Middle East in the past two decades.” Well except when the Arabs of the British mandate of Palestinian rioted in 1929 against the mere idea of the proposed Jewish emancipation. The rallying cry to the Jewish slaughter in Hebron was ‘The Jews are our dogs!’. Muslim hatred of Jews has always been with us, its roots are long and just as deep-seated as the Western kind. One can argue Muslim antisemitism was overall not quite as deadly if one wants to make a purely a numerical comparison. Although, neither is a desirable from my point of view and thank G-d for Eretz Yisrael.
And I owe you a hat tip for pointing Dawg’s Fox news link. He wrote something in the comments which really is worthy of its own post and I hope to be able to find the time to write about it this week which I think speaks more in depth to the left’s problem with Israel. But Dawg once said something when a commenter took Dawg to task over his ‘Israel-centric’ posts. He was being flippant and suggested why should the left concern itself with anti-semitism when it was the only form of racism and discrimination the right bothered itself with. Oddly enough, I think he might have a point.
Hal your new in my comments, so I would like to ask that you keep your biblical references to Torah or Talmud. Its hard enough on me when someone quotes Genesis 15:2 and I have to run to my Chumash and try to find which part of Bereshith they are quoting as it never quite corresponds with what I am reading and I keep feeling I am missing something. And Luke, well he maybe very fine but there is no new testament in my world. You might find this post worth a once over. Its written by an Israeli-centralist who I regularly enjoy reading.
If you and Dawg are through shouting at each other (this is where I am passing out the cognac and cigarettes), I have to say that I think Dawg is just the kind of person on the left we should be engaging – sure I am not up for every confrontation on his blog or mine – I do have another life outside of the blogs but he doesn’t blog what he does out of the malice which is so prevalent among bona-fide anti-semites on both the right and left. And yeah, when he gets pissed at me he often refers to me as a Kahanist. One of the things I think is lost on Dawg – is that he has no direct cultural context experience of Israel. Sure I am willing to wager he has met a couple of Israeli’s and a few Jews but I think he’s one of those people who would be best won over by seeing and experiencing Israel for himself. Of course, he’d need someone like me around to remind him to put himself in an Israelis shoes and to check his preconceived notions at the border rather than be on a tour with a group of ISM or Peace Now types.
And Hal, just so you don’t think I am picking on you this is directed at Dawg – you do realize this is an Ezra Levant free zone? I refused to get sucked into a discussion of official and unofficial Jews on my blog. Besides, I may not be perfect but it is the one form of Lashon hara I actively try never to be guilty of or engage in – although there are times when I have come close…but I am trying to do better.
@Hal Hal, I don’t mean to suggest those aren’t worthy people or causes to blog about, but I would expect Dawg wouldn’t chose to necessarily to blog about them because they already have their defenders. If there is a common theme to Dawg’s choices of blog-worthiness I suspect he picks those people and causes he feels are not only worthy of justice but are disenfranchised from the mainstream.
And yeah, when he gets pissed at me he often refers to me as a Kahanist
Well, not so much now.
Kate,
Well, you won’t find Luke in the Tanach or the Talmud (…at least, I don’t think so), but he’s readily available on the Internet. The reference – a legacy of my Sunday School days – is, of course, to the well-known admonition: “Physician, heal thyself.”
I can accept the argument that someone chooses to defend the (relatively) defenceless… until I notice that:
1. The defendants in Dawg’s cases, far from being defenceless, have vast armies of leftwing “anti-imperialists” mobilized in their defence. They have entire websites devoted to promoting their ostensible innocence… e.g. http://www.justiceforhassandiab.org or http://www.omarkhadrproject.com
2. The “villains” in each case are “imperialist powers” (and make no mistake, only western countries can be “imperialist” – China and Russia are exempt!). Unlike the other cases I mentioned above where the innocents (not “ostensible”; these are genuine innocents) are victims of totalitarian Islamic states. And we all know that Islamists are merely “resisting” the “imperialists”.
Which also explains why you’ll never find the truly horrific human rights crimes committed in say Iran or Pakistan or Saudi Arabia (let alone Gaza under Hamas) getting any mention on Dawg’s blog (or others of his ilk). Just as in the UNHCR (what a misnomer!), the focus is always on Israel. The Jews of Israel (never mind that they might just be the last Jewish refugees from Yemen, where recent pogroms have finally erased a rural community that predates Islam by over a 1000 years!) are the new “imperialists”.
P.S. I haven’t mentioned Ezra Levant and probably never will. I don’t know him except by hearsay. He’s Dawg’s topic, not mine.
P.P.S. I’ve seen Yaacov Lozowick’s site. Very good. He is thoroughly knowledgeable and cuts through the cant. Don’t expect to see him on Dawg’s blogroll. Lozowick was director of arhives at Yad Vashem for 14 years… and we all know what Israel uses that place for, don’t we?!
Hal’s dishonesty and, frankly, his racism, deepens and widens.
Innocence until proof of guilt is a fine principle, but for Hal it doesn’t apply to Muslims. (I know, I know, Muslims aren’t a “race,” but they’re treated as one by the Hals of this world. Folks with Arabic names and swarthy complexions are guilty just for the crime of existing.) The case against Diab is falling apart, and the one against Khadr has been brought into considerable question–all documented at my place.
China is colonialist insofar as Tibet goes. (Gosh, was that a link to my place?) Russia is doing its best to hold onto its empire (Chechnya comes to mind). But I’ll make and defend the claim that the US takes the prize for imperialism. So what? I’m on record–and Hal, in his numerous guises, knows this perfectly well–as having no truck with Islamism. More smears, more innuendo.
There’s no debate about Iran or Pakistan or Saudi Arabia. Our government doesn’t support those regimes uncritically, nor do they have influential lobby groups in Canada quick to pounce on critics of their regimes as being anti-Iranian, or anti-Pakistani, or anti-Arab racists. Why do people like myself harp on Israel? Because our government harps on Israel. Because the debate is always going on in the media (Rights and Democracy being only the latest example). People like Hal would simply like to silence half of that dialogue with lies and smears.
I know nothing of Yaacov Lozowick. I’ll have to make do on my blogroll for now with Nizkor and Engage. In in one further, filthy gesture, Hal suggests that I’m a Holocaust-denier. Sorry to abuse your hospitality, Kateland, but I shall take my leave at this moment. I think I need a shower.
No, Dawg, you’re not a Holocaust-denier (nice strawman!), but you are definitely an antisemitism-denier. As for folks with “Arabic names and swarthy complexions”, see http://www.thenation.com/doc/20100208/pollitt and http://www.cbc.ca/world/story/2009/11/22/bahari-interview.html and http://www.cbc.ca/world/story/2009/11/22/bahari-interview.html My point stands. They will never get a hearing on your blog because they have the great misfortune not to have Canada or the U.S. as their oppressors.
Duplicated link. Here’s the right one: http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/8484478.stm
Dawg, really you should check out Yaccov. He’s not bad, he even makes the rightwinger in me go ‘pause’. Like I said, he’s an Israeli centralist which if were to do a translation this into Canadian – puts him probably to the left of the NDP. Also what he wrote, explains some of what people like Hal and myself relate to immediately in some of the ways you use to express yourself at times when it comes to Israel.
Hal, check again, the Levant comment was clearly directly to Dawg. And I still don’t understand what exactly ‘Physician, heal thy self actually means’ – I suspect there’s context I am missing so the quote carries little meaning for me. I keep thinking doctors aren’t to treat themselves…blame my ESL.
Dawg, I think your feeling unduly sensitive about the alleged allegation of being a holocaut denier but feel free to be offended at being a antisemitism-denier.
Hal, I believe Dawg has given you a reasonable explanation how he goes about choosing what to blog or not about. I don’t necessarily agree with the idea that Canada has been unduly supportive of Israel but the conservative government has been more supportive than a previous liberal dominated governments. Its not anywhere I would like it to be, but that’s another post.
Dawg and I disagree regularly on this, and in the heat of the blog he does sometimes gets carried away and his snarkiness which can be quite offensive (a sin I have also been guilty of as well) – although, not so much at my house but at his own. Its easy to get fed up and cry ‘Jew-hater, Jew-hater’ and point fingers. He’s a socialist, and I doubt you will ever convince he not to be one – and considering most Israelis are socialists, he’d not be so out of line in Israel but it does tend to make him stand out here. I have taken many pot shots at him on the blog, and we have our ‘moments’ but he’s a far cry from an anti-semite. I have plenty of first hand experience, in fact, there’s a Star of David craved on my apartment door which reads, “kill the Jew” courtesy of some former neighbours of mine. It wasn’t the first one, there have been many others, but its the one I let stand, so every day when I put my key into the lock of my door, it reminds me of who and what I am, and what it means to be me. Dawg isn’t a hater or the ‘problem’.
I went back to that post on Truth is a defense, take a good look, Dawg came out swinging and then start reading the ‘updates’ and comments. As more evidence was presented to him he did modify his view. No he didn’t pull a mea culpa and lie down and be asked to be beaten for daring to think the worse from the get go. I wish he didn’t always assume the worse case scenario the second ‘Israel’ is mentioned but I suspect he has lived long enough to feel somewhat justified. Israel has many mistakes since 1948, some obvious, some not so obvious, is it a light unto all nations, not yet, but when I look at Israeli society in 2010, I see a large diverse community which is always struggling to demand better from themselves and their neighbours. They haven’t given up the fight – nor should we.
A few points.
a) I have only one “guise”, Dawg. I have never commented on your blog (though it appears that you once quoted me), and, to the best of my knowlege have only ever commented on a couple of blogs (Damian Penny’s and Jay Currie’s) where I have also seen your moniker. The sole occasion I was tempted to comment on your blog was after the “Truth is a Defence” post, but I was far too upset to compose a suitable response. I’m glad that Terry Glavin noticed your sleazy post and brought it to wider attention. (P.S. I’ve never commented on Glavin’s blog either; I generally don’t comment on blogs where formal registration is required. I’m happy to see, however, that a couple of commenters on Transmontanus also had your number.)
b) Kate, Dawg is not a Holocaust-denier and I don’t believe he is anti-semitic. But a toxic mixture of obsessive anti-Israelism and obtuse “anti-imperialism” has steered him into unsavoury territory where good-faith objections to his posts are immediately labeled as Israeli propaganda or worse (”They’re calling me an anti-semite!”), while the vilest calumnies about Israel pile up in the comments. This is the climate that led him to use Holocaust imagery to bash Israel in “None is Too Many” (what a sordid concoction that was!) and to the squalid depths of “Truth is a Defence”. He tried to back off that claim with a series of “updates”, but the damage was done. That post remains a monument to the current state of “anti-Zionism”.
Kate, I’ll check out Yaacov Lozowick.
But just signing off, why do we never get any criticism whatsoever about Jehudah Hiss from the “Dawg’s an anti-Semite, no, wait, now that I’m called on it he’s merely obtuse” set? There was a parallel bit of dishonesty going on at another blogsite, although that individual, very Hal-like in his style, I must say, has finally departed to allow the rest of us to argue in peace.
I’m rather tired of pointing this out, but here’s the link which led to my post:
http://jta.org/news/article/2009/12/21/1009830/report-israel-admits-to-harvesting-organs
Let daft gits like Hal wander over and drop their steaming innuendos there. I’m simply not going to engage with these simpletons any more. Thank goodness for people like you who argue in good faith, even if you’re wrong most of the time.
PS: If the subtle Hal didn’t mean to suggest I was a Holocaust-denier, why did he bring up Yad Vashem? Now he’s backing off at full speed–as well he might. But these folks always back off when you demand that they spit out their poison.
Backing off? On the contrary. The reference to Yad Vashem was a sarcastic “we all know what Israel uses that place for”… i.e. to stifle criticism. It’s the same with complaints about anti-semitism; they are always “specious” and their only purpose is to shield Israel from “truth”-tellers like you.
You are a nasty piece of work, Dawg. I can’t decide whether you are thoroughly devious or simply obtuse. Maybe Terry Glavin had the right description: morally illiterate.
“we all know what Israel uses that place for”… i.e. to stifle criticism.
Proof positive what a scabrous, lying fool Hal is. He never comes straight out with it–it’s all innuendo, lying by implication, smears.
If Hal or his scuttling brethren can find a single comment I have ever made in my life that denigrates Yad Vashem, let them PPOSTFU. I didn’t join Friends of Simon Wiesenthal, spend years taking on Holocaust deniers on Usenet, and organize against the Heritage Front to take this kind of casual defamation lying down.
Anyone who visits my place can find suitable denunciations of real anti-Semitism, and I have the “banned” list to prove it. Indeed, the post that caused gentle Hal so much distress had plenty of that. But you’d never know any of this reading his slimy half-truths or the defamatory drive-bys of his mendacious pal Terry.
Best to go to the sources. I always do.
But I do welcome liars like Hal to comment at my place (funny–they have names like “Henry” and “Harry,” but I’m sure that’s just coincidence). They do make my point wonderfully, as Hal has right here.
And, in case you need to bolster your “merely-the-messenger” exculpation of the organ-stealing story, here’s an update. Here, too, “troof” is a defence.
http://www.prisonplanet.com/activist-watch-out-for-idf-stealing-organs-in-haiti.html
http://www.hurryupharry.org/2010/02/05/the-haiti-libel/
It’ll be a cold day in hell before I join your comments parade… Are you suggesting I’ve posted surreptitiously as Harry (Abrams)? Then add paranoid to “devious” and “obtuse”.
No, Abrams is an honest man. He had the stones to call me an “anti-Semite” outright, making a perfect fool of himself in the process, but he speaks from the heart and doesn’t hide behind innuendo.
Refreshing after dealing with the likes of you.
I was thinking more of the “Guest” who recently uncloaked as “Henry.” Same low style. Feh.
And in case I wasn’t clear: I am not “Henry” either.
BTW, since you’ve been following this story so diligently, there’s an interesting update complete with an illustration by your favourite cartoonist, Latuff. He seems to have borrowed your words for his caption.
http://www.hurryupharry.org/2010/02/11/friends-of-lunacy/