Showing posts with label Petra MB. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Petra MB. Show all posts

Herr Augstein sees no reason to criticize Turkey (Petra Marquardt-Bigman)


It was already four years ago that the Simon Wiesenthal Center included the fairly prominent left-wing German journalist and publisher Jakob Augstein in its annual list [pdf] of people and groups responsible for the “Top 10 Anti-Semitic/Anti-Israel Slurs.” The ensuing controversy was explained in an excellent Tablet articleby James Kirchick.
A few days ago, it became clear that this controversy still reverberates: when Augstein reacted to news about the massive crack-down that followed the recent coup attempt in Turkey by declaring nonchalantly on Twitter that “Turkey’s democracy is none of our business; it’s up to the Turkish people,” Many people noted that his attitude to Israel (and the US) was markedly different. There was also astonishment that the staunch leftist would use the term “the Turkish people;” many noted in response that Augstein seems to feel no concern for Turkey’s minorities, particularly the Kurds. Unfazed by all this criticism, Augstein doubled down with another tweet asking: “What if the Turks have different requirements for their democracy than we for ours?” Again, this was an attitude that Augstein apparently reserves for Islamist governments mercilessly cracking down on their real or perceived opponents.

A sarcastic comment by the always brilliant Walter Russell Mead could serve as an excellent rejoinder to Augstein’s eagerness to overlook the alarming developments in Turkey: reacting to the news that the crack-down extended to universities, schools, hospitals, associations, foundations and unions, Mead mocked the argument that these measures were the prerogative of Turkey’s democratically elected government by tweeting“Thank goodness the forces of democracy broke the coup, or terrible news would be coming out of Turkey today.”

Quite obviously, Augstein’s stance doesn’t make sense, because what is going on in Turkey is very consequential for Europe, and it is arguably particularly important for Germany, where Turks form the largest ethnic minority and the largest group of non-citizens. Then there is the little matter of the endless debates and negotiations about Turkey’s accessionto the European Union (EU), which has meant that Turkey’s democracy and its policies have long been seen as issues that are very much also the EU’s business. Moreover, given that Turkey is a NATO member, concernsabout the current crack-down are all the more warranted.
To be sure, German media are full of critical commentaries about the developments in Turkey. One report, entitled “Alarm in Germany over Turkey” even notes that a prominent German history professor argued that the measures taken by Erdogan “amounted to a ‘total seizure of power’” as described in history textbooks “and exemplified in 1933 when democracy was eliminated in Germany by the National Socialists (Nazis) under Adolf Hitler.”
Since this history professor is known as a strong supporter of Israel, Augstein is likely to disagree with him on principle.
Augstein’s eagerness to shield Turkey’s repressive Islamist government from criticism throws his eagerness to criticize Israel into stark relief. In this context it is worthwhile to revisit and update the controversy that ensued in the wake of the Wiesenthal Center’s attempt to name and shame Augstein. In the already cited article from January 2013, James Kirchick summarized the case against Augstein as follows [emphasis added]:
To prove its case against Augstein, the Wiesenthal Center highlighted five excerpts from his articles over the past year. In one April column, Augstein alleged that “the president [of the United States] must secure the support of Jewish lobby groups” in order to stay in office. In the same column, he wrote that “the Netanyahu government keeps the world on a leash with an ever-swelling war chant.” In another column from November, Augstein wrotethat, “the Jews also have their fundamentalists, the ultra-orthodox Haredim,” who are “cut from the same cloth as their Islamic fundamentalist opponents. They follow the law of revenge.” In that same piece he referred to the Gaza Strip as a “lager,” a German word meaning “prison camp” which is redolent of the Nazi era. And then, in a piece endorsing Grass, he wrote that “Israel’s nuclear power is a danger to the already fragile peace of the world.”
Kirchick rightly notes that Augstein’s views are fairly common “in the world of anti-Israel polemicism.” However, according to him, “arguably the worst of Augstein’s columns was one from Septemberthat initially garnered the Center’s attention. The subject was the riots that erupted in response to the crude video lampooning the prophet Muhammed.” Augstein wrote there [emphasis added]:
The fire is burning in Libya, Sudan, Yemen, in countries that are among the poorest in the world. But the arsonists sit elsewhere. The angry young men, who burn the American—and more recently, German—flags are as much victims as the dead of Benghazi and Sana’a. Who benefits from such violence? Only the madmen and the unscrupulous. And this time also—as an aside—the U.S. Republicans and the Israeli government.”
As Kirchick went on to explain:
Arguments resorting to “Cui bono?” usually have a conspiratorial odor, and this one was no exception. Once again, the lazy moral equivalence characteristic of Augstein’s writing was apparent in his comparing the murdered American Ambassador Chris Stephens with the rent-a-mobs, who regularly ignite American flags at an imam’s whim, as analogous “victims.” Augstein’s rant also displayed an astonishing unfamiliarity with regional politics, for if he knew the first thing about the Israeli government he so despises, he would be aware that it is hardly made up of people enthusiastic about the changes the so-called Arab Spring has wrought.”
Last December, Augstein again attracted criticismwhen he noted in a column about far-right groups in France and Germany that “fascism was not just a phenomenon of the past,” while asserting at the same time that it was not surprising that the German far-right “had no problem with Israel” because the Israeli government was equally far-right. And while Augstein was worried about fascist tendencies on the far-right, he saw no reason to worry about antisemitism.
Now Herr Augstein sees no reason to criticize Turkey’s repressive Islamist government. He probably regards Erdogan and his AKP as “moderate” Islamists – very different from Israel’s terrible “ultra-orthodox Haredim,” who, as Herr Augstein sees it, are “cut from the same cloth as their Islamic fundamentalist opponents. They follow the law of revenge.” Incidentally, “Law of Revenge” was the title of the column where Augstein not only asserted that Israel’s ultra-orthodox were the equivalent of Hamas, but where he also insinuated that Israel was fighting against Hamas only because – just like Hamas – Israel was motivated by the “law of revenge.”
Let’s conclude with a few recent headlines:
Erdogan’s revenge: Turkey’s president is destroying the democracy that Turks risked their lives to defend.” (The Economist)
Looks like someone is following “the law of revenge” – if only there was a way to blame Israel for it...


We have lots of ideas, but we need more resources to be even more effective. Please donate today to help get the message out and to help defend Israel.
Share:

“The Jews are our misfortune” – 21st century edition (Petra Marquardt-Bigman)



The slogan “Die Juden sind unser Unglück“ – i.e. “The Jews are our misfortune“ was popular in Nazi propaganda. It appeared prominently on displays of the weekly magazine “Der Stürmer” and was regularly printed at the bottom of the publication’s title page.


Quite obviously, this slogan could also serve as a concise summary of the antisemitic world view: whatever is wrong or bad in your life and in your world must somehow be the fault of the Jews. The Hamas Charter reflects this view perfectly in Article 22, illustrating at the same time how the Nazi slogan was adapted for contemporary politics with an updated version: “The Jewish state/Zionism is our misfortune.” While the relevant paragraphs clearly echo popular anti-Jewish stereotypes about scheming Jews with lots of money and monstrously evil designs, they are also a bit evasive about who exactly “the enemies” are, though the parts I emphasized (bold & underlined) are clear enough:

“For a long time, the enemies have been planning, skillfully and with precision, for the achievement of what they have attained. They took into consideration the causes affecting the current of events. They strived to amass great and substantive material wealth which they devoted to the realisation of their dream. With their money, they took control of the world media, news agencies, the press, publishing houses, broadcasting stations, and others. With their money they stirred revolutions in various parts of the world with the purpose of achieving their interests and reaping the fruit therein. They were behind the French Revolution, the Communist revolution and most of the revolutions we heard and hear about, here and there. With their money they formed secret societies, such as Freemasons, Rotary Clubs, the Lions and others in different parts of the world for the purpose of sabotaging societies and achieving Zionist interests. With their money they were able to control imperialistic countries and instigate them to colonize many countries in order to enable them to exploit their resources and spread corruption there.

You may speak as much as you want about regional and world wars. They were behind World War I, when they were able to destroy the Islamic Caliphate, making financial gains and controlling resources. They obtained the Balfour Declaration, formed the League of Nations through which they could rule the world. They were behind World War II, through which they made huge financial gains by trading in armaments, and paved the way for the establishment of their state. It was they who instigated the replacement of the League of Nations with the United Nations and the Security Council to enable them to rule the world through them. There is no war going on anywhere, without having their finger in it.”
Indeed, a “Stürmer” cover from May 1934 that features a story about a murderous Jewish plan targeting all non-Jews would make a good illustration for this section of the Hamas Charter.


Even though it should be obvious enough that the Nazi slogan has been updated to “The Jewish state/Zionism is our misfortune,” there are endless debates about how to define contemporary antisemitism, and the question what, if any, anti-Israel activism should be regarded as antisemitic remains particularly contentious. But as I have argued elsewhere, there are countless examples that illustrate “that antisemitism is not a bug, but a feature of BDS: if your mission is to mobilize public opinion against the world’s only Jewish state in order to bring about its elimination, you will inevitably end up producing new versions of the Nazi slogan ‘The Jews are our misfortune.’”

Indeed, if one had to describe the output of professional anti-Israel activists like Ali Abunimah or Max Blumenthal and the sites they are associated with in one sentence, the most fitting one would be: “The Jewish state/Zionism is our misfortune.” And their audiences are certainly getting the message, as illustrated nicely in one minor recent example: in the wake of the coup attempt in Turkey, Twitter user Hadi Syed saw an article in Ha’aretz that emphasized that one of the suspected coup leaders had served as Military Attaché to Israel from 1998 to 2000. So Syed promptly tweetedthe article and tagged Max Blumenthal and Ali Abunimah, because he apparently knows full well that they are always interested in an Israeli angle if anything untoward is going on anywhere in the world.
Syed made a good bet: even though he has only 166 followers, his tweet got 95 re-tweets and 39 “Likes,” doubtlessly boosted by a retweet from Max Blumenthal as well as Ali Abunimah’s posting of the tweet together with the remark “Interesting.”

While Blumenthal and Abunimah may not find it worthwhile to promote this particular conspiracy theory now that the Hamas-friendly Islamist government in Turkey is mercilessly wiping out its opponents, they have often been determined to promote even the most absurd conspiracy theories in order to demonize Israel as the cause of everyone’s misfortune. One notable example is their promotion of utterly baseless claims that US police forces are brutal and abusive because they are inspired and trained by Israel. This particular subject is the specialty of their esteemed colleagueRania Khalek, who has produced numerous articles for Abunimah’s Electronic Intifada and other outlets implying that if it wasn’t for the world’s only Jewish state, the US and the world at large could be a much better place. The underlying message is indeed always the same: “The Jewish state is our misfortune.” And this lasting legacy of the “Stürmer” is by no means confined to the far-right.






We have lots of ideas, but we need more resources to be even more effective. Please donate today to help get the message out and to help defend Israel.
Share:

Ben Ehrenreich and the myth of Palestinian non-violence (Petra Marquardt-Bigman)

I am pleased to announce that Petra Marquardt-Bigman is the newest writer at EoZ. Petra is a German-Israeli freelance writer and researcher with a Ph.D. in contemporary history. She has had blogs at the Jerusalem Post and Times of Israel and has also published pieces in major newspapers.


Under the somewhat cynical title “Ben Ehrenreich Throws Stones at Conventional Wisdom About Israel,” The Forward recently gave Ehrenreich a platform to promote his new book, in which the Tamimis of Nabi Saleh and the myth of their supposed “non-violence” play a central role. EoZ has already exposed some of the most preposterous deceptions contained in an excerpt of Ehrenreich’s book, but the biggest deception Ehrenreich peddles is the myth of Palestinian non-violence. The apparent goal is to convince Americans that “we do need to stop funding this occupation,” or, as Ehrenreich put it in another recent interview: “the fact that the lockdown on criticism of Israel is now breaking up is a real opportunity. We shouldn’t forget that $3.1 billion American tax dollars goes to the Israeli military and that the US is in an absolutely direct way paying for what is happening over there … Americans who care about this have to make sure that it is not just questioned but powerfully challenged in a way that the political leadership in this country can no longer afford to ignore.”
Leaving aside Ehrenreich’s real or pretended cluelessness about US support for Israel, it is noteworthy that he acknowledges in the Forward interview “that people have been killed by stonethrowing and people have been injured by stones. Of course stones hurt if you’re hit by them.” But he claims the IDF confirmed to him that there are “no records at all of any soldiers ever being killed in a stone-throwing incident.” So Ehrenreich feels it is justified to wonder if there is “no form of Palestinian resistance so innocuous that it wouldn’t be condemned?” (Incidentally, Rabbi Alana Suskin, Director of Strategic Communications at Americans for Peace Now, quoted this question when she promoted Ehrenreich’s Forward interview on Twitter.)
So never mind the civilians – including children – who were killed or maimed by Palestinian rock throwers.
But when it comes to the Palestinian “resistance” that Ehrenreich so eagerly glorifies, he knows full well that neither the Tamimis nor the Palestinians in general are keen on anything “innocuous”. As polls of various reputable organizations going back almost two decades amply document, Palestinians have long been ardent supporters of violence and terrorism. Consider the following examples from Daniel Polisar’s important study:
“For most of the last decade-and-a-half, suicide bombings, which have generally been aimed at civilians and have been the most lethal in their impact, have enjoyed the support of solid Palestinian majorities. On 17 occasions between April 2001 and March 2013, JMCC asked, ‘How do you feel toward suicide-bombing operations against Israeli civilians?’ Supporters outnumbered opponents all but four times, and on average the level of support exceeded opposition by a full twenty points.”
Even when the victims are not Israelis, Palestinians enthusiastically support violence and terrorism:
“[Palestinians] led the world over the course of a decade in believing that Osama bin Laden, the mastermind behind the 9/11 attacks and a vociferous foe of Israel, could be counted on to ‘do the right thing in world affairs.’ In 2011, the last time Pew asked about bin Laden before his death at the hands of American commandos, the Palestinians once again outdid all others in their admiration, just as they did on various occasions in their favorable assessments of al-Qaeda—and (the one time they were asked in a Pew survey) of the Taliban.”
Moreover, while Ehrenreich laments Palestinian casualties in confrontations with Israel and the Forward notes with apparent admiration that he “makes no bones about siding with the losers,” the Palestinians themselves are firmly convinced that they are winning:
“a PSR survey that appeared after the August 2014 ceasefire ending the latest war between Israel and Hamas … reported, among other findings, that fully 79 percent of Palestinians believed Hamas had won the war and only 3 percent saw Israel as the victor. So convinced were respondents of their side’s strength that nine in ten favored continued rocket fire at Israel’s cities unless the blockade of Gaza were lifted, 64 percent declared their support for ‘armed attacks against Israeli civilians inside Israel’ (meaning, among other things, suicide bombings in Israeli population centers), and 54 percent applauded the event that in large measure had precipitated the 50-day war: the abduction and murder by Hamas operatives of three Israeli teenage boys hitchhiking home from school.”
As I have shown in a comprehensive documentation, the Tamimis of Nabi Saleh, who play such a central part in Ehrenreich’s new book, are absolutely representative of such “mainstream” Palestinian support for violence and terrorism. Back in 2013, Ehrenreich himself acknowledged in his New York Times Magazine tribute to the Tamimis that the family included several murderers – most notably Sbarro massacre mastermind Ahlam Tamimi – and that these murderers were greatly admired and “much-loved.”
Even though Ehrenreich’s reporting seems exceptionally unreliable, he got it right on this issue. The perfect illustration for just how right he got it are the first two people he profusely praises in the Acknowledgements at the end of his new book: the prominent Nabi Saleh “resistance” leaders Bassem and Nariman Tamimi. As I have shown in a previous EoZ post, both Bassem Tamimi and his wife Nariman (as well as their famous daughter Ahed aka “Shirley Temper”) are Facebook “friends” with a certain “Princess of the Free” – and the content posted by this user indicates that this pseudonym is used by Ahlam Tamimi, who displays as her profile and cover pictures images of Izz al-Din Shuheil al-Masri, the terrorist whom Ahlam sent to detonate himself in the crowded Sbarro restaurant in Jerusalem on August 9, 2001, killing 16 civilians , including 7 children and a pregnant woman, and wounding some 130 other people.

Nariman Tamimi has repeatedly shared posts from this page, including two posts last fall that called on individuals to perpetrate terror attacks on their own initiative and with whatever means they have available – in other words, something of a blueprint for the kind of “lone wolf” attacks that have characterized the wave of terror attacks that started last fall. Moreover, in remarks reported by an Israeli news site last September, Nariman Tamimi explicitly justified the Sbarro bombing as “an integral part” of the Palestinian struggle, declaring that “everyone fights in the manner in which he believes. There is armed uprising, and there is popular uprising. I support every form of uprising.”
And indeed, Nariman Tamimi’s Facebook posts provide ample evidence that she supports every kind of terrorism: she not only posted graphic instructions on the most lethal stabbing techniques, but also hardly ever failed to hail the perpetrators of terror attacks as heroes and glorious “martyrs.” One example is a post* Nariman Tamimi shared in the evening of March 8, glorifying the “General [grand master] of knives” who had just killed US Army veteran and Vanderbilt student Taylor Force and injured ten other people in Tel Aviv.
And while Ben Ehrenreich was busy promoting his book that glorifies the Tamimis, the Tamimis were busy glorifying* the teenaged murderer of a 13-year-old Jewish girl who was sleeping in her bed: as far as the Tamimis are concerned, this murder was a noble act that was necessary “to return to the homeland its awe/reverence”.
Whether the terror victim is a young and accomplished American stabbed to death while visiting Tel Aviv as a tourist, or a 13-year old girl butchered in her bed by a Palestinian youngster just six years older than her doesn’t really matter to the Tamimis: they will always feel admiration and patriotic pride. Ben Ehrenreich likely knows that, he just doesn’t want his readers to know it.

* Archived versions of the posts are here & here (time stamps do not correspond to Israel time); translations from Arabic courtesy of Ibn Boutros.



We have lots of ideas, but we need more resources to be even more effective. Please donate today to help get the message out and to help defend Israel.
Share:

A dog trainer defends Max Blumenthal’s vilification of Elie Wiesel at Mondoweiss (Petra Marquardt-Bigman)

Guest post by Petra Marquardt-Bigman

Max Blumenthal is a proud antisemitic anti-Zionist endorsed by the likes of David Duke, but after reacting to the news of Elie Wiesel’s recent death with abuse and vilification, he has now become the victim of a “witch hunt” – or so his loyal friends and fellow-Israel-haters would like everyone to believe. At the “hate site” Mondoweiss, the new and eminently qualified contributor Yakov Hirsch (“Professional Poker Player and Dog Trainer”) has a post (archived here) whose length presumably reflects how strongly he feels that Hillary Clinton was wrong to denounce Blumenthal’s vilification of Wiesel as “offensive, hateful, and patently absurd.” Naturally, Mondoweiss founder Philip Weiss eagerly promoted the output of his new writer on Twitter, where he asserted that Clinton’s denunciation of Blumenthal was a “witchhunt” and that Clinton “empowers ethnocentric violent extremists.”
Weiss is of course one of the professional anti-Israel activists who insist that their ardent anti-Zionism has nothing whatsoever to do with antisemitism. The output of Mondoweiss and other sites catering to anti-Israel activists undermines such claims on a daily basis by offering content that could be summarized with the slogan “The Jewish state is our misfortune” – which is just an updated version of the Nazi slogan “The Jews are our misfortune.” The defense of Max Blumenthal offered by Mondoweiss is a good example of the antisemitic anti-Zionism that is so typical of anti-Israel activism.
After highlighting some tweets denouncing the vilification of Wiesel by the popular Avi Mayer, the “professional poker player and dog trainer” who now writes for Mondoweiss muses:
“What is going on here? Why is it so difficult to understand that Elie Wiesel cannot be sacred to people whose sympathies lie with the Palestinians? … Even though it undoubtedly hurts Avi Mayer’s feelings that these people don’t show deference to his religious icons, this particular icon– Weisel [sic!] – was an enemy to the Palestinian people. … There are a lot of reasons for this blind Jewish ethnocentrism … But I’d like to use the Hillary Clinton statement on Wiesel yesterday to show the egregious role American politicians play in this phenomenon. It doesn’t take politicians long to figure out where the money is: Just try to talk as crazy as the craziest Jew and watch the money pour in. You can see this dynamic play out at every AIPAC conference.”
Well, where to begin? Does it really have to be pointed out to the “anti-Zionists” at Mondoweiss how incredibly offensive it is to describe “Weisel” as one of the “religious icons” of an observant Jew like Avi Mayer? And is it really necessary to explain what’s wrong with a statement like “Just try to talk as crazy as the craziest Jew and watch the money pour in”? How often does it have to be explained that American support for Israel reflects broad popular support and has deep historical roots? And why describe Wiesel as “an enemy to the Palestinian people”? Is it because he denounced Hamas as a “death cult” and felt that “Palestinian parents want a hopeful future for their children, just like Israeli parents do. And both should be joining together in peace”?
But it’s by no means only the “professional poker player and dog trainer” now moonlighting at Mondoweiss who can’t do without invoking age-old antisemitic tropes. The site’s founder Philip Weiss isn’t doing much better in his own recent post, where he writes under the title “In latest pander to Israel lobby, Clinton smears Max Blumenthal’s criticism of Wiesel as ‘hateful’”:  
“Bernie Sanders was able to build a campaign with us because he had escaped the financial clutches of the elitist Israel lobby … Clinton can’t escape those financial clutches. And she thinks she can only gain politically from smearing Max Blumenthal. … And: isn’t becoming president by marrying neoconservatism the definition of a deal with the devil? What does that do to U.S. foreign policy? Is that why she sought power? Is Hillary Clinton even in touch with her soul?”

Let me suggest an update for Weiss’s post: as reported in the Times of Israel, a cartoon program “recently aired on a Fatah-owned Palestinian TV station showed Jews siding with the devil to fight Muslims and the Muslim prophet Muhammad.” I think there are some scenes in this program that could illustrate the point Weiss is trying to make just beautifully.







We have lots of ideas, but we need more resources to be even more effective. Please donate today to help get the message out and to help defend Israel.
Share: