26 Feb 2003 | alisha said...

what? ML breaks the silence?

As far as I can tell, the Palestinians are seen most often as the abused underdogs here. It seems like they get a lot more publicity through the Brits. But this is only subject observation. All in all, I think the true villians here are Sharon and Arafat, who have both repeatedly sabotaged negotiations.

I think the solution is near at hand, as the Israelis are erecting a fence that will physically and psychologically divide Israel and Palestine. Sad but true. If thats the only way to achieve peace, then so be it.

26 Feb 2003 | Darrel said...

There's a Palestine?

Anyways, there are some differences here. I don't think it's easy to compare Israel with Saddam Hussein. (BTW, is Saddam really that evil to his people? I don't know. But my understanding is that he's done a lot of good too...Iraq is a very literate, educated country.)

26 Feb 2003 | James said...

The Palestinians do have some legitimate complaints, sadly their rabid anti-sematism and campaign of suicide bombings (and one sided U.S. News coverage) have led to a near total lack of sympathy in the U.S. Still hurting after 9/11 it's hard to take the side of a people who use the same tactics as terrorists.

Other nations, less recently affected by internal suicide attacks have less of a mental gap to jump. Personally the leaders of both sides need to be kicked up side the head, but then that's me.

26 Feb 2003 | omar said...

Iraq is a very literate, educated country. Understand that this education can come with a price. You may be held hostage for what you know. Youre family may be killed for what you know.

26 Feb 2003 | Steve said...

I find this argument very simplistic. I am not certain why opposition of Israeli policy is somehow equated with anti-Semitism.

I also have a hard time believing that people go around saying "Let's stick it to the Jews." I was, you know, talking to my pal in Holland and he said, "We gotta stick it to those Jews." Give me a break.

It would be simple enough to turn this argument around and say that the U.S. only supports the Kurds when they want to stick to the Arabs. The Kurds have been abused and attacked for many years but everyone just sat around with their thumb up their ass. Now, of course, the Kurdish people are of paramount importance. They must be protected from the bad man Saddam! Any one in the U.S. going around saying "Let's stick it to the Arabs."? Please.

As for standing up for Palestinians without standing up for other Arab nations, this smacks of selective reasoning. Europeans believe that Palestinians are being denied any chance of improving their lot by an outside oppressor (i.e. an illegal occupying force). The other Arab nations are being oppressed by internal forces that, for whatever reason, legally control the territory they live on. While no one likes the latter situation, everyone can agree that the citizens are the ones who must rise up. Except, err, the Iraqis. Gotta make the morally correct decision there y'know.

I agree with the above posters that leaders from both sides need to be placed in a small room with soft rubber bats so that they can resolve their differences.

26 Feb 2003 | p8 said...

So if you disagree with how the Palestinians are treated or criticize Israel you are labeled an anti-semite?

Here in Holland there have been small protests for the Palestinians, for the Kurds and many others.
Slightly depending on which parties are in charge our government is usually pro-Israel.
The protest against the war on Iraq was pretty big. Were all protesters anti-semite? Or are most concerned that many Arabs will die and the whole Middle East will become a huge conflict?

Maybe more Europeans protest against countries like Israel and the US because these countries are somewhat democratic and protests could have a small effect (maybe influencing our own leaders to take appropriate action) where as organizing a protest against someone like Saddam seems silly.
The moment also seems important. A decision has to be made about going to war with Iraq or not. A protest might have an effect on the decision makers. Getting people to protest against all the human rights violations which have taken place in the last 10 years in Iraq seems harder.

Being openly anti-semitic is not socially accepted in Holland. But since 2 years being openly anti-islamic seems acceptable to some people.

26 Feb 2003 | Tommy said...

I support Israel, I'm European and have blonde hair and blue eyes. So much for stereotypes.

26 Feb 2003 | Luke Andrews said...

It isn't the mere fact that Israel is criticized by Europeans that garners the charge of anti-semitism. Rather, it's the sheer volume of attention that Israel receives in comparison to any of the other places in the world where people may be oppressed. How come the European press barely mentions what's happening in Zimbabwe? Or how Christians and Muslims are treated in China?

As we all have noticed, Israel and Palestine receive a disproportionate amount of media coverage, and in the case of most of Europe, the decided tone is that Israel is the Apartheid-South-Africa equivalent, while Palestinians are poor, oppressed, people who have had every right and privelege taken away by brute force. It has never been so fashionable to sympathize with Palestinians in the left wing, or whatever passes for "progessive discourse" these days.

What no one will admit is that it's just not that simple. Israel deserves its fair share of blame, but it's getting it's fair share and then way more from Europe. The Palestinian Authority receives in comparison almost none. Where are the condemnations of terrorist acts? Why does no one ever want to examine the corruption and manipulation that belies Yasser Arafat's Palestinian Authority?

At the United Nations, Israel is pummelled daily by the General Assembly, and European nations often abstain rather than vote against absurd resolutions by pariah states like Syria that discuss "the Zionist entity." This is where people start to believe that the tone is anti-Semitic. It's doesn't help that Jews in Europe have suffered grievous trauma over the last few years: the resurgence of far-right wing politics, the suppresion of the right of free speech for Israel-supporters (many universities have "sanctions" against anything Israeli), the bombing of many synagogues, measures in "enlightened" places like Scandinavia to outlaw kosher meat...the list goes on.

I don't think, as Friedman suggests, that European support for Palestinians is rooted in anti-Semitism per se. There are plenty of legitimate reasons to criticize Israel. But the degree to which Israel, Israelis and Jews are shunned, and the narrow-minded focus on Palestine to the point of lunacy, are both marks that *something* more than simple political sympathy is at work. Anti-Israeli opinions may not be rooted in, but they are augmented by, anti-Semitism. There is a dangerous notion I have perceived among some people (not just in Europe) who claim Jews are allowed to "complain too much", as if the Holocaust were a license to advantage. This is absurd and dangerous. As absurd and dangerous as it is to believe that anti-Semitism somehow magically disappeared when the Nazi regime fell.

26 Feb 2003 | Josh said...

..."countries like Israel and the US because these countries are somewhat democratic..."

very nice subtle troll

26 Feb 2003 | ~bc said...

It is funny that the only Arabs people really raise a fuss about defending are the ones whose leaders condone terrorist acts against their oppressors, who happen to be the only remotely democratic nation in the region. The irony runs deep. Especially considering that Israeli opinion tends to be (from what I can judge thousands of mile away) "if they just stopped blowing us up, we'd set up something for them." But how can you trust a group of people represented by people who don't respect their own lives or the lives of others enough not to kill themselves while trying to hurt the maximum number of innocent people who might actually agree with the bombers...

26 Feb 2003 | Steve said...

Luke makes some good points. I think that both sides (Americans and Europeans) are looking at different sides of the same coin. In Europe, people see Israel (not Jews) as being the villain through its destruction of infrastucture, detention of civilians and any number of other "issues". In this light, the Palestinians are fighting back the only way they know how.

On the other side of the coin (and the Atlantic), Americans see Palestinians attacking civilians and blowing up buses and nightclubs. In this light (and their recent experience with terrorism), the Israelis are defending themselves any way they can.

While the Israelis may get raked over the coals by the Europeans, the Palestinians get the same by the Americans. Jews get singled out in Europe, Arabs get singled out in America. Anti-Israel attitudes in Europe, anti-Arab sentiment in America.

It all balances out, really. Two extremes, no middle ground.

I also believe that the general population in both America and Europe can see the above argument and that they think that if the two fools heading up the Israeli and Palestinian populations could be replaced with sane, reasonable individuals, this thing might get cleared up.

It's just the loudmouth "experts" like Friedman who make a living out of clouding the issues that are, well, clouding the issue with unrelated jabber about anti-semitism.

27 Feb 2003 | Thorarinn said...

How about putting another spin on the question? I think in many cases the European opinion isn't based on anti-Semitism, but rather anti-US-double-standard-ism.

Speaking for me personally (I'm Icelandic by the way), I'm well aware that both sides are to blame for the current state of affairs. What continually irritates me however is the special treatment I percieve Israel to receive from the US.

When the UN wants to step in and investigate accusations, Israelis object and the US makes sure the buck stops there. The whole thing is an internal affair that doesn't concern the UN.

Then when it comes to Irac, the US wants to take action against internal wrong-doings with the aid of the UN.

So I think a factor in all this has to be the perception many Europeans have of the American double standards when it comes to their role as an international police.

I'd like to see the US put effort into both finding a solution to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict and dealing with Irac. Not just stating that toppling Hussein will solve all problems in the Middle East.

Just my two cents.

27 Feb 2003 | MegaGrunt said...

I agree that the media does give the Israel/Palestine situation a disproportional amount of attention, but I think this has to do with the "Nothing to see here, move along" work of Israel's apologists, like Friedman and Cohen.

The more articles that are published like the one above, the more the spotlight sticks to the Israel/Palestine conflict. The more the apologists spin out their denials, the more attention is paid to what's really going on.

The more desperate the spin, the more the distortions in it really jump out and grab your attention.

For instance:

"They only become of interest if they are fighting Jews or being manhandled by Jews."

manhandled? What a word to describe Apache helicopters firing into residential buildings and indiscriminately killing women and children!

The level of self deception (or calculated lying?) is staggering.

27 Feb 2003 | jimbo said...

Israelis are enlightened enough to know better - thats the basic argument - were not talking about some nutcase dictatorship here. Israel wants to be counted as a modern democracy, so why is it committing such human rights abuses?

27 Feb 2003 | Original Jim said...

This isn't the first time I've heard this claim. Anti-Semitism is usually the first argument used when defending the less savoury aspects of Israel's recent history. Continuing Friedman's argument that criticism of Israeli policies is anti-Semitic, does this therefore mean he's defending the well documented human rights abuses of said country purely on the grounds that they they were commmitted by Jews?

Far too simple. Far too dumb.

As interesting is the way the article lumps together several dozen countries as "Europe". I guess it makes it easier when constructing "Us versus Them" arguments...

28 Feb 2003 | sleestak said...

"Anti-Semitic" is thrown around just like "Un-American" is nowadays. Maybe we learned that from the our "friends" in the Middle East.

28 Feb 2003 | alisha said...

exactly Original Jim.

Ironicly (or not so ironicly), it seems that a lot of support for the Palestinian cause comes from the UK. I see alot more activity and media over there for the Palestinians. Im sure it has to do with the fact that it was under British mandate.

28 Feb 2003 | Jason said...

I sincerely think this is more an issue of knowledge than anything else. Most of us don't know about Arab history, the difference between the various ethnicities (if that's the right word) within the Arab world and who's persecuting whom. With Jews and Palestinians, it's easy to see what's up.

Friedman suggests that we're only anti-persecution of Arabs when it's Jews doing the persecuting. I would like to think that most people are anti-persecution no matter what, but it's harder to draw the lines in the Islamic countries. But I don't speak for France.

28 Feb 2003 | spongebob squarepants said...

jason is some langer

06 Mar 2003 | Paperhead said...

ooh yeah, those terrible Palestinians and their terrorist ways. the state of modern israel was also founded on a terrorist ticket. go look up the Stern Gang and others. that's what bugs me about the situation, just the sheer hypocrisy. and just so everyone doesn't think there are clear lines in the sand here, there are israeli citizens who demonstrate in favour of an independent Palestinian homeland, just as there are Palestinians in favour of an independent Israeli state, then again on the 15th of last month there were marches anti war in Iraq marches in Israel that were attended by both Israelis and Palestinians.

Some other stuff, just because I feel like getting it off my chest. Committed to rebuilding a democratic Iraq. I presume that the US citizens here are aware that Afghanistan is still falling apart and that all your promises of rebuilding it aren't really amounting to much, in fact it's of so little importance now that the aid package for it was forgotten when the budget was drawn up and at the last minute an emergency package was put together for $300 million, which seems like a lot but is probably less that you are spending each week at the moment to keep troops stationed in the MidEast, just in case you go to war with Iraq. Cloudy isn't it? Added to that there are wholegroups of Kurds openly stating that they do not want an invasion of Iraq because they consider themselves to be, well, Iraqi. Then there's the troubling question of the Kurds in Turkey, who are horrendously persecuted, and indeed killed, by the Turkish state - yep the one the US government wants to give all that money to for a few landing stations. So, your US tax dollar is being simultaneously used to "liberate" good Kurds in Iraq and prop up a regime intent on punishing the "bad" Kurds in Turkey.

What is it with the editorials? There's actually real news available out there you know.

"But today there is no day or night,
Today there is no dark or light.
Today there is no black or white,
Only shades of gray."

god forgive me, i never thought i'd quote the Monkees :)

06 Mar 2003 | Steve said...

I have to admit that I find the growing trend of equating criticism of Israel and anti-Semitism to be both tiring and intellectually bankrupt (and maybe morally bankrupt, too).

Government does not equal ethnicity, race, or people. It's perfectly viable to criticize a government's rhetoric, policies and actions. It's desired. One can do so without hating the ethnicity or race of the people involved. To suggest that a criticism of a policy is actually a sign of racial hatred is not only illogical on its face, it's dangerous racial politics in and of itself. The Israelis - or anyone else, like the Armenians or the Roma or the Tutsis or the Bosnians or the Cherokee - don't get a free pass to violate laws and standards of human decency just because it was done to them. Nor does the fact that it was once done to them leave them immune from criticism. That is what is, at root, what the people who cry anti-Semitism are asking people to do. And I personally find that morally offensive.

06 Mar 2003 | Steve said...

Paperhead, please don't equate what my government does with what I think or do. It's a common tactic and mistake, but a country and its people do not equal its government. I made no promises to Afghanistan, I certainly reneged on no promises to Afghanistan; that's my government's doing. Incidentally, it's a government that I do not support, believe is wrong-headed at almost every juncture and currently is exhibiting almost every bad aspect of the American character.

Just as I don't believe that the Iraqi people should be made to pay for the sins of their government, nor do I believe that the American people should be lumped in and held somehow responsible or accountable for the sins of ours.

07 Mar 2003 | Paperhead said...

Steve - sorry, really didn't mean it that way . . .

07 Mar 2003 | Steve said...

Figured you probably didn't, Paperhead. It's just one of those things that's bugging me more and more lately as the rhetoric gets heated. Having lived in Europe, I know how easy it gets for people to go off about "you Yanks" to the nearest available target. My response usually was a simple statement that I dont' like my government, either.

It goes both ways, of course. I was absolutely stunned the other day by a story I saw about some company in Maine that stopped buying from one of their suppliers that happened to operate out of Germany. Were they upset or dissatisfied with teh company's products? No. They did it because of Germany's opposition to the US in the Secruity Council regarding Iraq. Unfortunately, the Maine company doesn't sell stuff straight to consumers, because I really wanted to write and let the company know that I would not be buying anything of theirs. I get so sick of this idea that if you don't march lockstep behind America you're somehow an enemy.

09 May 2003 | ravid said...

Just quoting here some of the participants.
You say: Apache helicopters firing into residential buildings
and indiscriminately killing women and children!
I say indiscriminately really. No mention of context.
You say: The Jewish Question
I say: That is really close to "Jewish Problem" How do you anwer the jewish question ?? the same way the "Jewish Problem" was solved ??

09 May 2003 | ravid said...

Just quoting here some of the participants.
You say: Apache helicopters firing into residential buildings
and indiscriminately killing women and children!
I say indiscriminately really. No mention of context.
You say: The Jewish Question
I say: That is really close to "Jewish Problem" How do you anwer the jewish question ?? the same way the "Jewish Problem" was solved ??

23 May 2003 | SJB said...

This stuff is golden for my essay i've got to write on judaism and the internet

03 Jul 2003 | Aaron said...

Re Europeans, ant-semitism, and the palestinian-israeli conflict: The European interest in the plight of the palestinians might be genuine, and then, it might not be. Without declaring that all European sentiment towards the Palestinians is rooted in anti-semitism (which probably all is not), I think it would be prudent to dissect this general sentiment with the outlying factors, historical as well as present: First, in America, where I am from, there's alot of criticism of the media for being subliminally biggotted against African-Americans. This may or may not be true, but, if we can't ignore America's several hundred years of institutionalized racism as a possible underlying cause of this alleged bigotry. Quite analogously, the Eurpopeans have a dark history of persecuting the Jews, also stretching back many centuries. The European media, as with its American counterpart, has been labeled on many occassions as biased against Israel. At base, this observation about media is merely to draw the conclusion that it would be intellectually dishonest to assume that a nations (or several nations') entrenched culture of racism is simply wisked away with a civil war or holocaust, and does not linger to effect contemporary views and policies.

Next, to address the notion that by merely supporting the Palestinians, Europeans are engaged in some form of covert anti-semitism. On its face, support for oppressed people is a cimendable thing. However, when the support is selective, this draws some suspicion. In short, given the European history of its own oppression of the Jews, its singling out of the Palestinians as a favorite cause is greatly suspect.

I hope I havent stated the obvious here, but I am concerned that those who begrudge being called anti-semites because they dont support Israel feel that they are right. True, it might be wrong to label someone anti-jewish because of their support for Palestinians. However,on the other hand, those people should take a serious look at their position. It may not be genuine, and they may not even know it.

29 Dec 2003 | http://www.handy-vertrag.net said...

http://www.handy-vertrag.net

29 Dec 2003 | http://www.handy-ohne-vertrag.net said...

http://www.handy-ohne-vertrag.net