Sunday, November 12, 2023

The Censure of Rashida Tlaib



By a vote of 234 to 188, the House of Representatives voted to censure Representative Rashida Tlaib, a Democrat from Dearborn, Michigan, for remarks she made, including advocating a Palestinian state "from the river to the sea."

The good news is that Representative Jamie Raskin did not claim, as others implausibly have, that "from the river to the sea" or "from the river to the sea, Palestine will be free" does not refer to abolishing Israel. The bad news is that he's wrong here.

Raskin stated

So I rise here not in spite of the fact that I'm a Jewish-American who supports the Constitution and Jewish democratic state and hates all the anti-Semitic rants and terrorists around the world from Putin in Russia and Mohammad bin Salman in Saudi Arabia to Hezbollah and Hamas. 

Referring to "anti-Semitic rants," the congressman could have added "such as now appearing on college campuses," but that would have been a risky Sister Souljah moment. Also, there are no more "Jewish-Americans" than there are "Protestant -Americans" or "Catholic-Americans." Still it was a pretty good start, followed by

I am here because of these things and because of everything I believe in and stand for. At this moment when democracy is under siege all over the world, America must stand tall for the Constitution of the United States and this resolution is about one thing and one thing only, the punishment of speech. So we have a chance to show the world what the American Constitution means and how we hold fast to our core principles, even when we're drawn away from them by our own passions and our righteous anger. The Constitution is the supreme law of the land the very hear of it is the First Amendment, which protects every citizen's freedom of speech and says "Congress shall make no laws abridging it."

H. Res. 845 proposed "censuring Representative Rashida Tlaib for promoting false narratives regarding the October 7, 2023 Hamas attack on Israel and for calling for the destruction of the State of Israel." As noted by NBC News, on November 3 the congresswoman had posted a video to a tweet of hers "featuring footage of pro-Palestinian protests from across the country, as well as remarks from President Joe Biden expressing his support for Israel. The video ended with Tlaib saying, “We will remember in 2024,” followed by the text: “Joe Biden supported the genocide of the Palestinian people.'”

Later that day, Tlaib posted a tweet defending "from the river to the sea," neglecting to admit that the full slogan is "from the river to the sea, Palestine will be free." For those following at home, that would be from the Jordan River to the Mediterranean Sea, which would obliterate Israel.

Raskin seems to understand that. However, his claim that the censure violates the First Amendment falls short for several reasons. A censure is not a law abridging freedom of speech or anything else. If a censure were a law, it would be called a law and be referred to as legislation rather than as a resolution. The action taken by the House is not punishment for speech because it's not punishment, but rather is an individual's colleagues expressing disapproval. As The Hill explains

A censure is a formal vote of deep disapproval of a member's conduct taken by either chamber of Congress....

A vote to censure another member of Congress does not hold any other power beyond a public condemning of that member's behavior. It does not expel a member from Congress or deny the rights or privileges of that member within Congress.

In fact, a censure has no power. It is an expression of disagreement, not a punishment for speech because it effects no punishment.  Most employment carries with it an understanding that statements unacceptable to the employer will not be tolerated. There are standards for speech, even outside the workplace, for the vast majority of jobs in society, including many even in the public sector.

Advocating disposal of our most loyal ally in the world, Tlaib added in her video "Joe Biden supported the genocide of the Palestinian people." It is a damnable lie, directed against both the President and Israel, and surely worthy of censure by colleagues of the individual promoting it.



Friday, November 10, 2023

The Responsibility of Holocaust Education



Malcolm Nance asks, and answers, the question of why there so many protesters of Israel are johnnies-come-lately.

Most of the people who are angry right now could not spell "Palestine" three weeks ago. They weren't angry when Bashir Assad used chemical weapons and mass murdered 500,000 of their own people.

There's a fight going on in Sudan right now. Five thousand people have been killed by two factions that have been fighting. Somalia, Libya, Lebanon.

Oh Jesus, Lebanon. I went to the civil war. They have been massacring each other to the tune of 125,000 people. ISIS literally tried to wipe out north Iraq and Syria and took slaves doing it.

What people are showing here is one of two things. One: this is something they could wrap their head around because there's a lot of cameras or to be quite honest, there's a lot of inherent anti-Semitism in this and maybe they think in solidarity with their Palestinian, brothers and sisters, who are angry, that this position is the right one.


And one more thing, which no one has on his or her bingo card as a reason for the immense hostility toward Israel's actions in Gaza. Nor will there be consideration that this could be a factor because it is unexamined and counter-intuitive. 

As of the end of 2021, there were twenty-one states which required schools to provide Holocaust education.  On the website of the United States Holocaust Research Museum, there are "Guidelines for Teaching About the Holocaust."  There are ten recommendations, although only one- "Contextualize the History"- pertains to my theory. There we read

Events of the Holocaust, and particularly how individuals and organizations behaved at that time, should be placed in historical context. The Holocaust should be studied in the context of European history as a whole to give students a perspective on the precedents and circumstances that may have contributed to it.

Similarly, the Holocaust should be studied within its contemporaneous context so students can begin to comprehend the circumstances that encouraged or discouraged particular actions or events. For example, when thinking about resistance, consider when and where an act took place; the immediate consequences of one’s actions to self and family; the degree of control the Nazis had on a country or local population; the cultural attitudes of particular native populations toward different victim groups historically; and the availability and risk of potential hiding places.

Encourage your students not to categorize groups of people only on the basis of their experiences during the Holocaust; contextualization is critical so that victims are not perceived only as victims. By exposing students to some of the cultural contributions and achievements of 2,000 years of European Jewish life, for example, you help them to balance their perception of Jews as victims and to appreciate more fully the traumatic disruption in Jewish history caused by the Holocaust.

Ironically, if the guidelines advocated by the Holocaust Museum are routinely reflected in the teaching of the Holocaust, this singularly barbaric event is taught out of context. There are two instances in this section in which "European" is mentioned.  The words "Arab," "Persian," or "Muslim" are not listed here, nor anywhere in the Guidelines. This portion of Jewish history is critically relevant to understanding the milieu in which the Holocaust took place. The Time of Israel explains

Jews were an enduring presence in the Middle East and North Africa before the advent of Islam and Arabian conquests, yet today fewer than 4,000 Jews live in the region. This contrasts with post-Holocaust Europe, where 1.4 million Jews currently reside. So much for the Moroccan proverb, “A market without Jews is like bread without salt.”

Beginning with Iraq’s notorious Farhud pogrom on June 1–2, 1941, Jews in Iraq and elsewhere faced intensified persecution akin to what took place in pre-Holocaust Nazi Germany as leaders such as Iraqi prime minister Rashid Ali al-Gaylani sought to emulate Hitler’s tactics.

 During the two-day Farhud in Baghdad and other Jewish population centers in Iraq, Jewish homes were marked so mobs could destroy them. In the process, 180 Jews were recorded as murdered. Similar to Kristallnacht in Germany and Nazi-occupied lands, shops and religious buildings were looted and set ablaze.

 The word “Farhud” means “violent dispossession” in Arabic, the prophetic name given to the pogrom by Iraqi citizens. About 135,000 Jews lived in Iraq in 1941, but almost the entire community relocated to Israel within a decade of the pogrom.

 “The Farhud was a turning point because it was the first step in this Jewish community’s dispossession,” said Black.

 The Holocaust directly reached Tunisia, Algeria, and Morocco, as well as Lebanon and Syria, through the Vichy France regime. In German and French documents, those lands were considered part of Europe for the purposes of the genocide.

For example, after the Nazis invaded Tunisia, some 5,000 Jewish men were sent to forced labor camps. In France, 160 Tunisian Jews were deported to the death camps. Despite the genocide’s reach into Tunisia, the country was home to the region’s largest Jewish community outside Israel until the 1970s.

After Nazi Germany’s defeat in 1945, the persecution of Middle Eastern Jews in no way slowed down.

Outside of Israel, there no longer are many Jews in the Middle East and it is no coincidence. There were periods of severe violence and oppression of Jews. As noted here, "in the ninth century, for example, Baghdad's Caliph al-Mutawakkil designated a yellow badge for Jews, setting a precedent that would be followed centuries later in Nazi Germany."

As a response especially to the Holocaust, but also to the mistreatment of Jews in the Muslim-dominated Middle East, the state of Israel was created in 1948 upon a tiny sliver of land surrounded by Arab and Persian nations. Jews in large numbers had resided in the land of Palestine since time immemorial. Great Britain in 1922 was awarded the Mandate for Palestine and expected to create from it a Jewish homeland.  In November 1947 the United Nations adopted a resolution to partition Palestine into a Jewish state and an Arab state, the latter east of the Jordan river. Great Britain announced it would relinquish the Mandate on March 15, 1948 and on March 14, Israel declared its independence.

The following day, five Arab countries launched a war against the new nation.

This is a part of the history of the creation of Israel which often is forgotten. It is even unknown to many individuals, especially young people. They've heard of the Holocaust, perpetrated by the German nation, and may even have studied it. Yet, Tel Aviv is killing a large number of civilians in the Middle East and is located nearly two thousand miles from Germany. Being ill-informed, young people may be averse to the idea of having a Jewish state in the Middle East.

Holocaust education, if conducted as the US Holocaust Research Museum recommends, reinforces the perception a young person already has about Israel's origin as being entirely due to atrocities committed by Europeans.  Contributing to this ignorance was President Barack Obama, who in a speech in Cairo in June, 2009 failed to distinguish between mainstream Islam and fundamentalist Islam, at one point remarking

The attacks of September 11, 2001 and the continued efforts of these extremists to engage in violence against civilians has led some in my country to view Islam as inevitably hostile not only to America and Western countries, but also to human rights... 

And throughout history, Islam has demonstrated through words and deeds the possibilities of religious tolerance and racial equality. 

(Imagine a Republican today extolling the virtues of Christianity and ignoring the dangers posed by extremists claiming to be devout Christians. Democrats would be apoplectic, largely justifiably.)

The Holocaust was the main driver of creation of the state of Israel, and most Muslims, like most Jews, Christians, and others, are relatively peaceful.  Yet, a full and complete picture is being denied to many students. If an anti-Western bias pervades Holocaust education, young men and women are getting a skewed version of history.  And the results, in both anti-Semitism and uninformed, sometimes prejudiced, bias against Israel, are glaringly obvious.



Wednesday, November 08, 2023

Better Reason Needed



I agree with Nate Silver- and, in a way, with Symone Sanders
. 



After David Axelrod suggested President Biden run for re-election only if he believes it in the best interests of the Democratic Party and of the country, Sanders remarked

Democrats- especially Democratic strategists- know- anyone who is a professional politico knows, reporters know- Joe Biden is President of the United States of America, therefore the head of the Party that he is on the ticket of. He is a Democrat and if the President of the United States of America can, if eligible for re-election, and decides to do so, that's your nominee, baby. 

That's how it works. I know that that might not sound democratic but that is the game. That's how it works.

Sanders is right when she states "that might not sound democratic," where "might not sound" should be replaced by "isn't."

Biden is likely to be re-nominated or, rather, be "your nominee, baby." However, it does not have to be that way. We didn't need to see the awful results of the recent New York Times/Siena College poll to know that the President's re-election is imperiled. 

In response to Silver, one tweeter logically asked "if that's what dem voters wanted why did no one credibly primary him?"  It's a fair question because the only other declared candidate, Minnesota's Dean Phillips, is arguably not in it to win it. In his recent article in The Atlantic, Tim Alberta asked whether by challenging Biden, Phillips would make it more difficult for the incumbent to win next November. The congressman responded "I want to strengthen him. If it's not me, I want to strengthen him. I won't quit until I strengthen him. I  mean it. I do not intend to undermine him, demean him, diminish him, attack him, or embarrass him."

Ever reluctant, the Minnesotan declared his candidacy only after (with limited success) asking his colleagues for the personal phone number of governors in their states; booking national television appearances to lobby for someone to join the race; and placing "a few last-ditch phone calls" to get someone to run.

Obviously, no one bit. That was partially because of a fear that challenging the king (as Democrats appear to perceive a President of their party) would harm his chance of defeating Donald Trump in November of 2024. However, if that were the only reason, it simply would not be the Democratic Party, circa 2023.  As reported on September 5, 2023- and ignored by everyone- party strategist Karen Finney boasted

When you had people who were trying to test the waters, the party rose up and made it clear to those individuals — who were mostly white men — that to disrespect the vice president would not be well received by women and people of color within the party They got a little bit of a smack in the face. 

If we are to take her at her word, Symone Sanders definitively supports Biden because as the incumbent and leader of his party, he must be re-nominated,  That bears an obvious similarity to someone who also has been President, is the unchallenged leader of his party, and to whom members of his party have been required to pledge allegiance. Democrats and others have heaped justified scorn on the Republican Party for its unwillingness to question Donald Trump.

Worse is the conviction that if a vice president was a bad state attorney general, is shamelessly opportunistic, and is by merit extremely unpopular nationally, and is a risk to usher in a second Trump term, she must nonetheless not be challenged or questioned. Even worse is that allegiance to her is demanded because of gender and race, demographic characteristics determined not by the individual herself but her parents.

It's ironic, really. Joe Biden has been inarguably the most successful, and arguably the best Democratic President- hence the best President- since at least the LBJ era.  Yet there is more concern about his re-election bid than there was of the previous two, inferior, Presidents of his party.

But the court of public opinion has little regard for the ways in which a President moves the country forward.  Joe Biden is old and people know it. If Joe Biden were to die in office, Kamala Harris would become President of the United States of America and Commander in Chief of the Armed Forces when called into service.  President Trump looms- or if not President Trump, President Generic Republican.

It is not a hopeful scenario, Biden appears headed for a loss, and this is no time for Democratic pundits and strategists to conclude that he deserves to be re-nominated simply because of the race and gender of his running mate or because he is the de jure head of the party.



Monday, November 06, 2023

Jewish Voice For Abolishing Israel



As far as is known, Jewish Voice for Peace is not a comedy troupe.
Nonetheless, the group would be better as a comedy troupe. "Stop trying to tell Palestinians what they mean when they call for freedom." Sorry, no. Just no. The "don't take me literally" cry has been popular with the Donald Trump crew and the LGBTQIA+ community. Words, though, have meaning and "from the river to the sea" obviously refers to eradication of Israel as we know it.

Exactly right:

The conservative columnist and podcaster Jonah Goldberg notes

Any other phrase, word, or term that gives offense or threatens violence to any other group is deemed unacceptable by social justice types. But here we're supposed to ignore what the mass murderers and terrorists mean by the phrase and act as if it's unfair to not give Rashida Tlaib et al every benefit of the doubt when they're clearly using it as a dog whistle.

The hypocrisy is obvious, although little should be canceled if it merely gives offense. However, the slogan does threaten violence to residents of Israel and closely parallels the Hamas charter. Since the slaughter of 10/7, which (further) revealed what Hamas plans for Israelis, the slogan has become more ubiquitous as the world has become less appalled by the massacre and less comfortable with the existence of Israel in the Mideast.

Supporters, whether identifying as a Jew, Christian, or anything else, must remain vigilant by condemning the continued aspiration for elimination of the Jewish state clothed in a catchy, rhyming, murderous slogan.






Saturday, November 04, 2023

Not a War Over Occupation


The tweeted excerpt begins at 1:10 of the video.
"What Hamas did was horrific and there is no justification for it. And what is also true is that the occupation and what's happening to Palestinians is unbearable" significantly contradicts a remark the former President makes later. Can you guess what it is? (Hint- it begins at 1:10).

 At 1:10 of the video accompanying the tweet, ex-President Obama states

And what is true is that there are people right now who are dying who have nothing to do with what Hamas did. And we can go on for a while- but, I mean, we could go on for awhile.... 

Obama correctly notes that "there are people right now who are dying who have nothing to do with what Hamas did." Hamas did what it did without consulting Gazans and without regard to the best interests of Gazans, over whom it rules.

But the 44th President moments earlier had tied Hamas' "horrific" action to "the occupation and what's happening to Palestinians."

"What's happening to Palestinians" has nothing to do with the slaughter by Hamas of Israelis. Nothing. The occupation is taking place in the West Bank, which is not even contiguous with Gaza. The Palestinians in the West Bank are ruled by the Palestinian Authority, controlled by Fatah, the party which is the largest faction of the Palestine Liberation Organization.  It is distinct geographically, politically, even theologically from Hamas. As explained by Reuters

Hamas has run the Gaza Strip since 2007, after a brief civil war with forces loyal to the Fatah movement led by President Mahmoud Abbas, who is based in the West Bank and heads the more secular PLO.

The Hamas takeover of Gaza followed its win in Palestinian parliamentary elections in 2006 – the last time they were held. Hamas accused Abbas of conspiring against it. Abbas described what happened as a coup.

The incursion into Israel and massacre of 1400 or so of its residents and kidnapping of hundreds of individuals has nothing to do with occupation of the West Bank, other than as an excuse provided for individuals hostile to, or at least unsympathetic with, the existence of a Jewish state in an otherwise Muslim-dominated Middle East. Hamas did not invade the West Bank or attack Jewish settlements there. In its invasion of Israel, it targeted civilians rather than military assets.

Tel Aviv will say it is battling Hamas. Whatever its success against that band of wealthy terrorists (the 1% which the race left has little anger toward), the Israeli Defense Forces have killed many Gazans.

That's G-A-Z-A-N-S.  They are not residents of the West Bank and their interests are not identical.

Conflating Gazans and "Palestinians" is a neat- and popular- trick. It is an effort to undermine the Israeli interests and minimize Hamas brutality by drawing upon the concerns, many legitimate, of residents of the West Bank. Merging the aims of Hamas with the needs of other ethnic Palestinians is 

Arguably worse yet, given its broader implications, is the implication that Gazans and Palestinians are identical. As widely presumed, they are very similar- racially. 

And that goes to the heart of a core tenet of Democratic politics, one central to the belief system of many Democrats, with all others too cowed to offer rebuttal. As Bill Maher told Joe Rogan two months ago, "I have always believed, as liberals do, in a color-blind society. The goal is not to see race at all anywhere for any reason. The woke believe race is first and foremost the thing you should always see everywhere, which I find interesting because that used to be the position of the Ku Klux Klan."

We're far from achieving that goal and it will be achieved only in fits and spurts, if at all. However. the means to that end or anything remotely close to it is not to hold race first and foremost. It should not be ignored- but it should not be used as the primary determinant of policy.

Palestinians wherever in the Middle East are typically thought of as brown and thus, with many center-left Democrats (e.g., Obama) and most progressive Democrats (e.g., Rashida Tlaib), it's reasonable to lump Gazans- and Hamas- in with all  Palestinians. Israelis, by contrast, are a mixed lot, due in part to the lineage of some from that region and others from Europe. The nation, moreover, is universally considered to be "an outpost of Western civilization," which is not in vogue with today's race-obsessed Democratic Party.

Racialism is gaining currency throughout society. However, it is prominent in Democratic circles, helped along by one of our mediocre ex-Presidents. and is clouding a clear understanding of a war initiated by terrorists whose tactics and goal are being increasingly condoned by Americans and the world.



Thursday, November 02, 2023

Hail Fetterman


Last week, reporter Mike Elk attended at Tree of Life Synagogue in Pittsburgh a commemoration "marking the 5th anniversary of the 11 Jews that were killed there in the biggest massacre of Jews in U.S. history."  He reported that Pennsylvania senator John Fetterman, who was "at the edge of the ceremony,

has refused to back a ceasefire and has denounced those who have supported it. 

Last week, after someone spray painted the phrase “Free Palestine PGH-Gaza” on the side of local Allderdice high school down the street from the massacre, Fetterman tweeted that the graffiti was “reprehensible.” Then, Fetterman tweeted out a photo of his Senate wall with pictures of Hamas’ Israeli hostage, saying that “the only thing that belongs on a wall right now is this.”

When I asked Fetterman why he objected so much to someone spray painting the phrase “Free Palestine – PGH-Gaza” on a high school, he falsely stated that the message read, “Free Palestine from the river to sea, Palestine will be free.”

Fetterman defended his denouncement of the spraying painting.

“I don’t believe that whatever message you’re able to make shouldn’t be vandalized on a high school in the middle of Squirrel Hill, “says Fetterman. “I am really about making sure that Israel is able to do what Israel deserves to do.

Disappointingly, but not unexpected from a journalist of the left


The entire slogan is not "free Palestine" but "from the river to the sea, Palestine will be free" and it most assuredly has not been official U.S. policy. Official U.S. policy has been support for a two-state solution, not a Palestine free of Jewish influence, as in "from the (Jordan) river to the (Mediterranean) sea."

An interesting spin on racialism has become prevalent on the far left, and on a limited basis on the near left. It has not dropped one bomb or launched one missile against Palestinians as we've known them. Tel Aviv has not attacked the Palestinians on the west bank, the Palestinians of Jordan (where Palestinians are in the majority), or Hezbollah in Lebanon. Yet, Israel is charged with pounding "the Palestinians" as if it is waging war against an entire race.

So John Fetterman thought "Free Palestine-PGH-Gaza" read "Free Palestine from the river to the sea, Palestine will be free." The student must have run out of spray paint or space on the wall, or was simply lazy.  Journalist Elk apparently is not familiar with "a distinction without a difference."

 


Graham's Myth



Once upon a time, Lindsey Graham told presidential candidate Donald Trump to "go to hell" and that he is "a race-baiting, xenophobic, religious bigot."

Graham later visited Donald Trump at the White House and played golf at the President's golf resort, and came out as an enthusiastic Trump supporter. Otherwise, he didn't "come out" and clearly is still in the Trump loyalist phase of his personal journey

That is absurd. While speaking on Sunday in Sioux City, Iowa and giving a shout-out to Sioux Falls (South Dakota), Trump boasted "about threatening to abandon U.S. allies, even if Russia attacked one of them." He

notably also said he had threatened to withhold U.S. military aid from NATO members unless they paid the bloc more. He said, at one point, he told member state leaders, “We’re not going to protect you any longer.”

“The head of a country stood up, said, ‘Does that mean if Russia attacks my country, you will not be there?’ That’s right, that’s what it means,” Trump said to applause. “I will not protect you.”

“And the money came!”

Trump’s refusal to step in even in the case of a Russian attack is notable considering how much he loves Russia’s leader, Vladimir Putin. Trump and Putin enjoy a particularly cozy relationship, and Trump has repeatedly praised the Russian president.

Given the fact that Republican support for the war in Ukraine is on the wane, Putin must be overjoyed that the party’s presidential front-runner is actively advocating letting Russia attack whichever countries it wants.

In an early August interview on NewsNation, John Bolton, a national security adviser in the Trump Administration

called the deal with the Taliban that led to the U.S. withdrawal a “disastrous mistake” and said that his dealings with Iran fell short. He also said Trump threatens the U.S. relationship with NATO.

“In a second Trump term, we’d almost certainly withdraw from NATO,” he said.

Obviously, if Donald Trump had won re-election, Vladimir Putin would have been more eager to invade Ukraine. Without support from NATO which President Biden has been able to cobble together, Ukraine would have been overrun swiftly. And Hamas terrorists would have invaded Israel, made easier because Benjamin Netanyahu, once a Trump favorite, and Israel's security forces dropped the ball.

Nonetheless, there is good reason, aside from being compromised by Trump, for Graham to remark

I believe, if Trump were President, none of this would be going on. If he gets to be President in 2025, this would end pretty quickly. Whether you like Trump or not, there was order in the world that's been lost.

There may not have been order in the world when Donald Trump was President. Hamas was eyeing the opportunity to do its imitation of genocide by slaughtering Israelis, and Putin had his eye on Ukraine. But with the misleading nature of hindsight, we believe that there had been order, that the world was topsy-turvy. And Trump, as the prior President, is perfectly situated to exploit this feeling which voters have.

He was, after all, President before Biden was President. In George Orwell's classic Animal Farm, Squealer rhetorically asked ".... it is for your sake that we drink the milk and eat those apples. Do you know what would happen if we pigs failed in our duty? Jones would come back!"

The horror of it all! The animals would be better off if Jones returned but exclaiming, without explanation, "Jones would come back!" creates the assumption that things were worse. When Lindsey Graham asserts "whether you like Trump or not, there was order in the world that's been lost," he's addressing independent-minded voters, who are less ideological than Republicans or Democrats and are vulnerable to an assumption that things were simply better in an earlier time.

It's a deceptively strong argument in the court of public opinion with low-information voters, particularly those less committed to either political party.  It may not be rational but this is a country which once voted for Donald Trump for President and which counts among its Senators a guy who is now a passionate advocate for a race-baiting, xenophobic, religious bigot." 



The New Pledge of Allegiance

Last month, Representative Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez infamously stated "I have a local city councilman that has this saying 'Woke 1...