The Daily public editor is supposed to be a sort of ombudsman, designed to help people look at unfair articles, bias, conjecture and have a chance to be heard. The comment section underneath the article is open to all, and is a democratizing element. Unfortunately, the Daily views its public editor role differently than I view it. Here he is policeman, not public defender; he wants to quash the comments, not publish them or look at the Daily itself. Here is an example:
" As (editor in chief) Hohmann points out, the primary focus of The Daily staff is on the paper itself, not its Web site, and so it should be. It’s fine if it takes awhile for The Daily to come up with a good solution for allowing comments. The status quo, however, is an embarrassment. As a temporary measure, The Daily should remove its commenting system."
I would add that HIS JOB should have its primary focus on the paper itself, not the website. As a frequent commenter in the Stanford Daily who has been censored repeatedly for having views that differ from the editors' UNSIGNED editorials , and who has been censured by other editorials and letters on those rare occassions I have been published, I believe the public editor is trying to quash diverse viewpoints. Not only is this wrong, it is dangerous. Again, the comments on the article are better than the article, and nearly all criticize the editorial. Without the comment section, his overbearing editorial would have "stood."
Monday, November 26, 2007
"Cranky, condemning emails" condemned BY the Daily
"Cranky, condemning emails from students who are just passionate enough in their opinions to disapprove of what others have worked hard to create are a phenomenon that is familiar to most campus groups."
I can't make this stuff up. Its too good. The Daily editors condemn their critics. The comment section was particularly good under this article. One commenter said to substitute the word "editorial" for "email."
I can't make this stuff up. Its too good. The Daily editors condemn their critics. The comment section was particularly good under this article. One commenter said to substitute the word "editorial" for "email."
Tuesday, November 13, 2007
Stanford Daily does the right thing
The Stanford Daily deserves credit for standing up to Jerry Yang and his weak backboned caving to the Chinese government by handing over sensitive documents about a Chinese dissident that then were used to punish the dissenter. This contrasts to Yang's "fortitude" in standing up to the French on an item of no consequence. When Yahoo can do something of consequence it does nothing. When it can do nothing of consequence, it makes a show of "standing up."
http://stanforddaily.com/article/2007/11/13/editorialDisillusionedByBrilliance
http://stanforddaily.com/article/2007/11/13/editorialDisillusionedByBrilliance
Amanda Gelender-Can Jews be Anti-Semites?
Background: Amanda Gelender published an article in the Stanford Daily stating that since she was Jewish, she could not be an anti-Semite, and was therefore free to excoriate Israel to her heart's content. In response, I copied this article from Rachel Neurwirth that is a nice rejoinder to Amanda.
Jewish Anti-Semitism
Rachel Neuwirth, October 30, 2004
The existence of "black sheep" in families is not all that unusual. What stands out among various ethnic groups is the unique degree of malevolence exhibited by the Jewish black sheep against their fellow Jews, which would then qualify them as Jewish anti-Semites. Simply having Jewish ancestors is no obstacle to being an anti-Semite.
We can consider a spectrum of moral behavior ranging from the most ethical to the most evil. This article deals only with consciously (in my opinion) anti-Semitic Jews and not with those Jews who are only misguided into supporting evil but who do not consciously intend to do harm. Jewish anti-Semites usually pose as Jews with a legitimate goal, such as promoting peace or simply exercising their right of free speech for a noble purpose.
It is hard for many people to believe that those of Jewish ancestry could actually be anti-Semites. To the uninitiated and the unsuspecting their arguments can even seem persuasive, all of which can be confusing in determining who is right and who is wrong. This article suggests some measures by which to detect the Jewish anti-Semites. It will also cite specific examples of such. In addition it helps to have a grasp of history, plus individual judgment and common sense in detecting the presence of actual Jewish anti-Semitism.
In general the following characteristics are often indicative of Jewish anti-Semites:
Demanding full rights for all Arabs living inside Israel while also demanding that Jews must be expelled from any area where Arabs dominate numerically and from where they attack Jews.
Willingness to use deception and disinformation in the form of outright fabrications, exaggerations and selective omissions to attack Israel and its efforts at self-defense.
Double standard: Great concern for Arab suffering vs. minimal lip service for Jewish suffering.
No attempts to show solidarity with Jewish causes and to alleviate Jewish suffering with visits to victims of terror or to help fund food for hungry and unemployed Israelis.
Minimal personal involvement with traditional Jewish religious observance.
Will arbitrarily alter Judaic teachings and practice to support their anti-Israeli political agenda.
Advocating Israeli territorial concessions regardless of any resulting danger to security needs.
Ignoring, minimizing or even excusing the preaching and teaching of murderous hatred towards Israel, Zionism and Jews by Arab leaders and in Arab schools.
Arguing that any support for Israel is somehow disloyal and harmful to American interests.
Citing their being `Jewish' as conferring some type of authority to speak legitimately as Jews or on behalf of other Jews. Attempting to exploit their accident of birth for political advantage, even against fellow Jews, could be considered a form of racism.
Ignoring basic Jewish concerns such Jewish education, opposing anti-Semitism, lobbying for Jewish rights and for disadvantaged Jews.
Not addressing fellow Jews in the spirit of dialogue and respect for other's views. Their `voice' is often strident, harsh, accusatory and inciting outsiders to join in condemning Israel and Zionism including economic boycotts.
Strongly supporting the international left which, in turn, supports Israel's enemies.
Some examples of what I believe to be Jewish anti-Semitism:
The Yevsektsiya
We find a historical summary of this organization with the following excerpts:
Yevsektsiya or Yevsektsia Derogatorily, a Yevsektsiya member was called a Yevsek. Yevseki was the Jewish fraction of the Communist Party of the Soviet Union, created in 1919 to challenge and eventually destroy the rival General Jewish Labor Union and Zionist parties, suppress Judaism and Bourgeois nationalism and build up a Proletarian Jewish culture, as well as to impose the ideas of Dictatorship of the proletariat onto the Jewish worker class. Another important aim of the Yevsektsiya was to mobilize the Jewish Diaspora in favor of the Soviet regime. For most of its existence, the Yevsektsiya was headed by Semyon Dimanstein.
Persons of Jewish origin were over-represented in the Russian revolutionary leadership. However, most of them were hostile to traditional Jewish culture and Jewish political parties, and were eager to prove their loyalty to the Communist Party's Atheism and Proletarian internationalism, and committed to stamp out any sign of Jewish cultural particularism.
In 1919, Zionist parties' headquarters in Moscow and Petrograd were taken over, their membership arrested and their newspapers shut down. In April 1920, the All-Russian Zionist Congress was broken up by the Yevsektsiya activists and the Cheka. Seventy-five delegates were arrested on the spot, thousands of members were sent to prison for counter-revolutionary... collusion in the interests of the Anglo-French bourgeoisie... to restore the Palestine state [i.e. the future Jewish homeland as envisioned after WWI and ratified by the League of Nations]
Lenin wrote in his Critical Remarks on the National Question (1913): "Whoever directly or indirectly puts forward the slogan of a Jewish 'national culture' is (whatever his good intentions may be) an enemy of the proletariat, a supporter of the old and of the caste position of the Jews, an accomplice of the Rabbi and the bourgeoisie." The Bolshevik considered Hebrew language a "reactionary language" since it was associated with both Judaism and Zionism, and was officially banned by the Narkompros (Commissariat of Education) in 1919. Hebrew books were seized from the libraries. Famous Habima Theater had to obtain an official permission to exist from Lenin, but later was branded a "Zionist nest" and ceased to exist in 1926. At the same time, an effort to encourage "Soviet proletarian culture" in Yiddish language" was made, as a countermeasure against traditional Jewish "bourgeois" or "Shtetl" culture."
The Yevsektsia was disbanded in 1929, after the creation of the Jewish Autonomous Soviet Socialist Oblast. Many of its members perished in the Great Purge.
The forgoing is also a good general definition of the hard line Jewish left. It may have begun idealistically as promoting a vision of universal brotherhood, justice, equality and peace. But they did not hesitate to turn against their own in fulfilling the cruel suppression of their own Jewish religion and culture. They bought into the dictum that the end justifies the means. As Jews they were better positioned to spy on the Jewish community and seek out rabbis trying to secretly educate Jewish children in their heritage and report them to the secret police where severe punishment awaited. They were willing to commit major human rights crimes against fellow Jews in pursuit of their high global ideals. The leftist Jewish anti-Semite is willing, even eager, to betray his people and his heritage even in the cause of a cruel despotism that preaches a false idealism. Note their anti-Jewish ferocity existed even without a Jewish state and without the Palestine issue which are prime issues today.
The Yevsektsia continued to operate well into the Stalinist period and apparently was not at all disillusioned by Stalin's mass killings of innocents. Once they had sold their souls there were apparently no second thoughts about how their original idealism had been turned into just another totalitarian barbarism. This rigid mentality has survived in the Jewish anti-Semite of today where many of the same characteristics remain.
The Neturei Karta (Guardians of the City)
"Rabbi Moshe Hirsch, known as the 'Foreign Minister' of Neturei Karta, has never hidden the fact that he prefers a Palestinian state in place of Israel - the Neturei Karta sect refuses to recognize the state of Israel until the coming of the Messiah. However, now it appears, from documents disclosed by the Israel defense establishment, that Rabbi Hirsch has also been in the pay of PA Chairman Arafat himself." This from the Oct 25, 2004 Maariv International (Israeli newspaper)
Please go here and read an article that begins:
Among the hundreds of documents (captured from the Muqata during Operation Defensive Shield) dealing with money allotted by Arafat, two were found which related to large sums paid to Rabbi Hirsch for "expenses for activities." The payments in question, one after another, were unusually large ($25,000 on January 13, 2002, and $30,000 on February 14, 2002) and may indicate that Arafat paid him monthly. It should be noted that the amounts are significantly larger than those given to other cronies, which varied between a few hundred and a few thousand dollars.
It is one thing for Jews to have disputes over theological issues - it happens all the time. It is quite another for them to ally with Arafat, the father of modern terrorism, who has killed more Jewish civilians than anyone since Adolf Hitler. Hirsh and his Neturei Karta are in alliance with the PLO which has never changed its original covenant that requires the eradication of the State of Israel. Here is another example of seemingly orthodox Jews acting in concordance with those who systematically slaughter Jewish men, women and children. And they even take blood money in the process.
American Council for Judaism
This organization is an offshoot of the America Jewish reform movement. It was founded in 1942 during the darkest days of WWII. They argued that Judaism is a religion with no connection to any territory despite what the Bible teaches. They opposed the Zionist program to restore Jewish sovereignty in the historic and Biblical land of Israel. Their position also opposed any Palestinian escape routes for Europe's Jews threatened with extermination. Their web site is www.acjna.org. They remain narrowly focused on a negative message and lacking any broad, constructive program to build up the Jewish people or defend their rights, or oppose anti-Semitism which they blame on the "Zionists."
The Holocaust survivor as Jewish anti-Semite
These people present a special public relations problem to the general Jewish community. How can anyone possibly challenge the opinions of an elderly survivor after all they have suffered? Simply claiming that near-martyr status is like having a hand of cards holding four aces - it trumps everything else. Suddenly it does not matter if they were atheists, communists, self-hating Jews, or even just plain nuts before or after the Holocaust. It may be considered bad form to even raise such questions. Being a Holocaust survivor is the ultimate in moral credentials and to then attack Israel could even be seen as displaying heroic courage and wisdom.
A recent political attack on Israel by Hedy Epstein, a 79-year-old Holocaust survivor, seemed to follow a suspiciously familiar script. After first claiming Holocaust survivor status, and after a perfunctory acknowledgement of Jewish victims, she then launches her attack. She is a member of the International Solidarity Movement (ISM) which advocates for the Arabs and against Israel and she is on a speaking tour. She complains about witnessing Israeli measures to control hostile Arabs and cites examples of their "humiliation". In her own words she personally and repeatedly reached out to comfort inconvenienced Arabs but cites no similar effort on her part to comfort bereaved Israeli families who are victims of Arab terror. Her double standard is evidenced in her own words.
Hitler's 'final solution' targeted all Jews without moral distinction. Therefore Holocaust survivors are not necessarily more moral or more wise than Jews in general, including Hedy Epstein, although we respect their suffering. We also have a duty to both the living and the dead to never become a party to slandering fellow Jews. To allow slander is to repeat the old demonizing of Jews that in the past has contributed to their mass murder.
Jewish Anti-Semitism
Rachel Neuwirth, October 30, 2004
The existence of "black sheep" in families is not all that unusual. What stands out among various ethnic groups is the unique degree of malevolence exhibited by the Jewish black sheep against their fellow Jews, which would then qualify them as Jewish anti-Semites. Simply having Jewish ancestors is no obstacle to being an anti-Semite.
We can consider a spectrum of moral behavior ranging from the most ethical to the most evil. This article deals only with consciously (in my opinion) anti-Semitic Jews and not with those Jews who are only misguided into supporting evil but who do not consciously intend to do harm. Jewish anti-Semites usually pose as Jews with a legitimate goal, such as promoting peace or simply exercising their right of free speech for a noble purpose.
It is hard for many people to believe that those of Jewish ancestry could actually be anti-Semites. To the uninitiated and the unsuspecting their arguments can even seem persuasive, all of which can be confusing in determining who is right and who is wrong. This article suggests some measures by which to detect the Jewish anti-Semites. It will also cite specific examples of such. In addition it helps to have a grasp of history, plus individual judgment and common sense in detecting the presence of actual Jewish anti-Semitism.
In general the following characteristics are often indicative of Jewish anti-Semites:
Demanding full rights for all Arabs living inside Israel while also demanding that Jews must be expelled from any area where Arabs dominate numerically and from where they attack Jews.
Willingness to use deception and disinformation in the form of outright fabrications, exaggerations and selective omissions to attack Israel and its efforts at self-defense.
Double standard: Great concern for Arab suffering vs. minimal lip service for Jewish suffering.
No attempts to show solidarity with Jewish causes and to alleviate Jewish suffering with visits to victims of terror or to help fund food for hungry and unemployed Israelis.
Minimal personal involvement with traditional Jewish religious observance.
Will arbitrarily alter Judaic teachings and practice to support their anti-Israeli political agenda.
Advocating Israeli territorial concessions regardless of any resulting danger to security needs.
Ignoring, minimizing or even excusing the preaching and teaching of murderous hatred towards Israel, Zionism and Jews by Arab leaders and in Arab schools.
Arguing that any support for Israel is somehow disloyal and harmful to American interests.
Citing their being `Jewish' as conferring some type of authority to speak legitimately as Jews or on behalf of other Jews. Attempting to exploit their accident of birth for political advantage, even against fellow Jews, could be considered a form of racism.
Ignoring basic Jewish concerns such Jewish education, opposing anti-Semitism, lobbying for Jewish rights and for disadvantaged Jews.
Not addressing fellow Jews in the spirit of dialogue and respect for other's views. Their `voice' is often strident, harsh, accusatory and inciting outsiders to join in condemning Israel and Zionism including economic boycotts.
Strongly supporting the international left which, in turn, supports Israel's enemies.
Some examples of what I believe to be Jewish anti-Semitism:
The Yevsektsiya
We find a historical summary of this organization with the following excerpts:
Yevsektsiya or Yevsektsia Derogatorily, a Yevsektsiya member was called a Yevsek. Yevseki was the Jewish fraction of the Communist Party of the Soviet Union, created in 1919 to challenge and eventually destroy the rival General Jewish Labor Union and Zionist parties, suppress Judaism and Bourgeois nationalism and build up a Proletarian Jewish culture, as well as to impose the ideas of Dictatorship of the proletariat onto the Jewish worker class. Another important aim of the Yevsektsiya was to mobilize the Jewish Diaspora in favor of the Soviet regime. For most of its existence, the Yevsektsiya was headed by Semyon Dimanstein.
Persons of Jewish origin were over-represented in the Russian revolutionary leadership. However, most of them were hostile to traditional Jewish culture and Jewish political parties, and were eager to prove their loyalty to the Communist Party's Atheism and Proletarian internationalism, and committed to stamp out any sign of Jewish cultural particularism.
In 1919, Zionist parties' headquarters in Moscow and Petrograd were taken over, their membership arrested and their newspapers shut down. In April 1920, the All-Russian Zionist Congress was broken up by the Yevsektsiya activists and the Cheka. Seventy-five delegates were arrested on the spot, thousands of members were sent to prison for counter-revolutionary... collusion in the interests of the Anglo-French bourgeoisie... to restore the Palestine state [i.e. the future Jewish homeland as envisioned after WWI and ratified by the League of Nations]
Lenin wrote in his Critical Remarks on the National Question (1913): "Whoever directly or indirectly puts forward the slogan of a Jewish 'national culture' is (whatever his good intentions may be) an enemy of the proletariat, a supporter of the old and of the caste position of the Jews, an accomplice of the Rabbi and the bourgeoisie." The Bolshevik considered Hebrew language a "reactionary language" since it was associated with both Judaism and Zionism, and was officially banned by the Narkompros (Commissariat of Education) in 1919. Hebrew books were seized from the libraries. Famous Habima Theater had to obtain an official permission to exist from Lenin, but later was branded a "Zionist nest" and ceased to exist in 1926. At the same time, an effort to encourage "Soviet proletarian culture" in Yiddish language" was made, as a countermeasure against traditional Jewish "bourgeois" or "Shtetl" culture."
The Yevsektsia was disbanded in 1929, after the creation of the Jewish Autonomous Soviet Socialist Oblast. Many of its members perished in the Great Purge.
The forgoing is also a good general definition of the hard line Jewish left. It may have begun idealistically as promoting a vision of universal brotherhood, justice, equality and peace. But they did not hesitate to turn against their own in fulfilling the cruel suppression of their own Jewish religion and culture. They bought into the dictum that the end justifies the means. As Jews they were better positioned to spy on the Jewish community and seek out rabbis trying to secretly educate Jewish children in their heritage and report them to the secret police where severe punishment awaited. They were willing to commit major human rights crimes against fellow Jews in pursuit of their high global ideals. The leftist Jewish anti-Semite is willing, even eager, to betray his people and his heritage even in the cause of a cruel despotism that preaches a false idealism. Note their anti-Jewish ferocity existed even without a Jewish state and without the Palestine issue which are prime issues today.
The Yevsektsia continued to operate well into the Stalinist period and apparently was not at all disillusioned by Stalin's mass killings of innocents. Once they had sold their souls there were apparently no second thoughts about how their original idealism had been turned into just another totalitarian barbarism. This rigid mentality has survived in the Jewish anti-Semite of today where many of the same characteristics remain.
The Neturei Karta (Guardians of the City)
"Rabbi Moshe Hirsch, known as the 'Foreign Minister' of Neturei Karta, has never hidden the fact that he prefers a Palestinian state in place of Israel - the Neturei Karta sect refuses to recognize the state of Israel until the coming of the Messiah. However, now it appears, from documents disclosed by the Israel defense establishment, that Rabbi Hirsch has also been in the pay of PA Chairman Arafat himself." This from the Oct 25, 2004 Maariv International (Israeli newspaper)
Please go here and read an article that begins:
Among the hundreds of documents (captured from the Muqata during Operation Defensive Shield) dealing with money allotted by Arafat, two were found which related to large sums paid to Rabbi Hirsch for "expenses for activities." The payments in question, one after another, were unusually large ($25,000 on January 13, 2002, and $30,000 on February 14, 2002) and may indicate that Arafat paid him monthly. It should be noted that the amounts are significantly larger than those given to other cronies, which varied between a few hundred and a few thousand dollars.
It is one thing for Jews to have disputes over theological issues - it happens all the time. It is quite another for them to ally with Arafat, the father of modern terrorism, who has killed more Jewish civilians than anyone since Adolf Hitler. Hirsh and his Neturei Karta are in alliance with the PLO which has never changed its original covenant that requires the eradication of the State of Israel. Here is another example of seemingly orthodox Jews acting in concordance with those who systematically slaughter Jewish men, women and children. And they even take blood money in the process.
American Council for Judaism
This organization is an offshoot of the America Jewish reform movement. It was founded in 1942 during the darkest days of WWII. They argued that Judaism is a religion with no connection to any territory despite what the Bible teaches. They opposed the Zionist program to restore Jewish sovereignty in the historic and Biblical land of Israel. Their position also opposed any Palestinian escape routes for Europe's Jews threatened with extermination. Their web site is www.acjna.org. They remain narrowly focused on a negative message and lacking any broad, constructive program to build up the Jewish people or defend their rights, or oppose anti-Semitism which they blame on the "Zionists."
The Holocaust survivor as Jewish anti-Semite
These people present a special public relations problem to the general Jewish community. How can anyone possibly challenge the opinions of an elderly survivor after all they have suffered? Simply claiming that near-martyr status is like having a hand of cards holding four aces - it trumps everything else. Suddenly it does not matter if they were atheists, communists, self-hating Jews, or even just plain nuts before or after the Holocaust. It may be considered bad form to even raise such questions. Being a Holocaust survivor is the ultimate in moral credentials and to then attack Israel could even be seen as displaying heroic courage and wisdom.
A recent political attack on Israel by Hedy Epstein, a 79-year-old Holocaust survivor, seemed to follow a suspiciously familiar script. After first claiming Holocaust survivor status, and after a perfunctory acknowledgement of Jewish victims, she then launches her attack. She is a member of the International Solidarity Movement (ISM) which advocates for the Arabs and against Israel and she is on a speaking tour. She complains about witnessing Israeli measures to control hostile Arabs and cites examples of their "humiliation". In her own words she personally and repeatedly reached out to comfort inconvenienced Arabs but cites no similar effort on her part to comfort bereaved Israeli families who are victims of Arab terror. Her double standard is evidenced in her own words.
Hitler's 'final solution' targeted all Jews without moral distinction. Therefore Holocaust survivors are not necessarily more moral or more wise than Jews in general, including Hedy Epstein, although we respect their suffering. We also have a duty to both the living and the dead to never become a party to slandering fellow Jews. To allow slander is to repeat the old demonizing of Jews that in the past has contributed to their mass murder.
"We publish only a fraction"
Background-- The Stanford Daily rejected about two dozen consecutive submissions on the Middle East that were pro Israel, prompting the following exchange:
Dear Editor
I submitted two letters this week regarding articles in the Daily, neither of which was published. As you most likely know, if you worked for the Daily last year, I seem to have hit a wall as far as having my letters published. Were my letters considered? Will you consider future submissions I might have? If not, can you explain why not? Thanks in advance.
Sincerely
and received the following response:
We receive a high number of letters to the editor, of which we only publish a small percentage. If you have questions regarding particular letters, please contact the Opinions editor, In Ho Lee, at inholee@stanford.edu.
-Nick
The Stanford Daily, Volume 232
Dear Editor
I submitted two letters this week regarding articles in the Daily, neither of which was published. As you most likely know, if you worked for the Daily last year, I seem to have hit a wall as far as having my letters published. Were my letters considered? Will you consider future submissions I might have? If not, can you explain why not? Thanks in advance.
Sincerely
and received the following response:
We receive a high number of letters to the editor, of which we only publish a small percentage. If you have questions regarding particular letters, please contact the Opinions editor, In Ho Lee, at inholee@stanford.edu.
-Nick
The Stanford Daily, Volume 232
Friday, November 9, 2007
Hanan Ashrawi-- more Daily bias
The Stanford Daily refused to publish the following reply to their coverage of Ashrawi, so it is republished here:
Editor
The headline "Speaker talks peace in Palestine" is grossly misleading if one takes the time to do background research. Hanan Ashrawi, former PLO spokesperson, says that the occupation must end before peace talks can begin.
Amazingly, the article fails to point out the Palestinian Authority has already agreed to dismantle terror outfits as Step One of the Road Map and that negotiations are to follow, but before a Palestinian state is formed. However, the PA has been unable or unwilling to do so, so Ashrawi proposes that we skip the "fluff" and create a state anyway.
Unfortunately, it would be a mortal danger for Israel to do so, and it is unlikely to occur. With a Palestinian state and NO PEACE, as Ashrawi proposes, Palestinians could shell S'derot and Tel Aviv, creating havoc throughout Israel. It would be better to maintain the occupation, until Palestinians arise who are willing and able to adhere to agreements they have signed.
Sincerely,
xxxxxxx
If you think the Daily should have printed this letter send a note to eic@daily.stanford.edu
Editor
The headline "Speaker talks peace in Palestine" is grossly misleading if one takes the time to do background research. Hanan Ashrawi, former PLO spokesperson, says that the occupation must end before peace talks can begin.
Amazingly, the article fails to point out the Palestinian Authority has already agreed to dismantle terror outfits as Step One of the Road Map and that negotiations are to follow, but before a Palestinian state is formed. However, the PA has been unable or unwilling to do so, so Ashrawi proposes that we skip the "fluff" and create a state anyway.
Unfortunately, it would be a mortal danger for Israel to do so, and it is unlikely to occur. With a Palestinian state and NO PEACE, as Ashrawi proposes, Palestinians could shell S'derot and Tel Aviv, creating havoc throughout Israel. It would be better to maintain the occupation, until Palestinians arise who are willing and able to adhere to agreements they have signed.
Sincerely,
xxxxxxx
If you think the Daily should have printed this letter send a note to eic@daily.stanford.edu
Thursday, November 8, 2007
Blatant anti Semitism at the Daily May 4, 2004
http://stanforddaily.com/article/2004/5/4/lettersToTheEditor
Joe Webb, perennial crank, protests that "anti-Semitism is going to become illegal." And, the Daily publishes it!
Joe Webb, perennial crank, protests that "anti-Semitism is going to become illegal." And, the Daily publishes it!
Ashrawi's and photographer's bias, another day at Stanford
Why would Stanford students stage a "die-in" to protest Israeli policies? The photo was appended to an article about the speech by Hanan Ashrawi, the glib former PLO spokesperson, the article about which is here: http://stanforddaily.com/article/2007/11/6/speakerTalksPeaceInPalestine
Ashrawi's talk was interesting because she stated that Israel needed to "end the occupation" BEFORE there could be peace talks. That contradicts the Road Map, which was endorses by Israel, the Palestinian Authority and the Quartet. According to the Road Map, the Palestinians have to dismantle terror groups in Stage One, and a Palestinian state would be established at the end. However, the Palestinians have not been able to adhere to the Raod Map so Ashrawi wants, essentially, to "give them a state anyway " (my words). This also contradicts the whole point of the land for peace negotiations that Israel has insisted upon for two generations (Palestinians want land but not peace). Finally, the existential threat to Israel from Hamas/Fatah is not even mentioned, because it is not regarded as important.
The "die-in " picture implies that Israel is murdering Palestinians. However, the use of a picture avoids the need to discuss facts, because the facts do not support that implication. The Daily is covering an event, with opinions. However, where is the coverage of the Israeli buses and grandmothers and children who have been blown to smithereens by terrorists from the Palestinian Authority and Hamas who were TARGETING civilians? That coverage does not exist.
If you want to protest, please do at eic@daily.stanford.edu
Why Amanda Gelender is WRONG
The Stanford Daily published an article from undergraduate Amanda Gelender, who stated that she was Jewish and therefore could not be accused of anti-Semitism. She then went off on a column length rant on the evils of the Jewish state of Israel. Her article is here http://stanforddaily.com/article/2007/11/5/opedIsraeliOccupationInjusticeInOurName and she discusses Israeli policy as it reflects herself as a Jew. The article was completely unbalanced and some of the more egregious parts were corrected in a reply here http://stanforddaily.com/article/2007/11/6/opedABroaderPerspective . Kudos to the author of the piece.
However, the article still has a number of assertions that need to be refuted. First, the issue is simply that Jews cannot be antiSemitic (consider the case of Torquemada, among others). Nor is it that anti-Zionism and anti-Semitism, according to contemporary studies, are more or less synonymous, at least in Europe http://hnn.us/articles/28503.html. Nor is it that Amanda ought to join Peace Now, a Jewish peace group, instead of lending her name to forces that are overtly enemies of Israel.
Rather, the basic issues are whether the assumption, that the occupied territories ought to become an independent Palestinian state, are correct. The withdrawal from Gaza has led to one Israeli city . S'derot, becoming a war zone due to Palestinian shells. One sovereign power, Hamas, teaches that Israel should not exist, and the other, Fatah, pretends that it can reach an agreement with Israel despite having limited power. All indications are that an independent Palestinian state would lead to the rest of Irael becoming a war zone as Palestinians would then revert to the maximalist position of rejecting a two state solution. Palestinians could shell Israeli cities including Tel Aviv. So, the logical Israeli position is to reject the assumption, further withdrawals, and a Palestinian state. This issue is not addressed by the Daily editorials.
However, the article still has a number of assertions that need to be refuted. First, the issue is simply that Jews cannot be antiSemitic (consider the case of Torquemada, among others). Nor is it that anti-Zionism and anti-Semitism, according to contemporary studies, are more or less synonymous, at least in Europe http://hnn.us/articles/28503.html. Nor is it that Amanda ought to join Peace Now, a Jewish peace group, instead of lending her name to forces that are overtly enemies of Israel.
Rather, the basic issues are whether the assumption, that the occupied territories ought to become an independent Palestinian state, are correct. The withdrawal from Gaza has led to one Israeli city . S'derot, becoming a war zone due to Palestinian shells. One sovereign power, Hamas, teaches that Israel should not exist, and the other, Fatah, pretends that it can reach an agreement with Israel despite having limited power. All indications are that an independent Palestinian state would lead to the rest of Irael becoming a war zone as Palestinians would then revert to the maximalist position of rejecting a two state solution. Palestinians could shell Israeli cities including Tel Aviv. So, the logical Israeli position is to reject the assumption, further withdrawals, and a Palestinian state. This issue is not addressed by the Daily editorials.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)