Looks like the folks at Facebook have more to worry about than their plummeting stock price (off 28% since the IPO last week). In recent days, Facebook suspended the account of the Israeli graphic artist, Mysh, about whom I wrote a post a few days ago. It seems that some of the brilliant political graphics I praised in that post must’ve offended the delicate sensibilities of the pro-Israel crowd. I’m guessing there was a movement to complain about the images. And Facebook’s nanny patrol took a look at them and agreed. At least three images have been removed from Facebook and Mysh’s account was suspended for 24 hours as “punishment” for being such a bad boy and saying such mean things (and referencing the Holocuast) about the Israeli pogromists who assaulted African refugees in Tel Aviv a few days ago.
The problem is that Mysh did nothing wrong. In fact, his graphic art is brilliant political satire. It’s the hasbara crowd and their enablers at Facebook who should be ashamed of themselves. I expect that sort of behavior from the Israeli right. But I expect Facebook not to kowtow to such a censorious crowd. Let’s ask a few questions of FB’s censors:
1. Does this mean that you can’t feature a cartoon about the Holocaust on Facebook?
2. Does this mean that cartoons combining Holocaust imagery and criticism of Israel are treif on Facebook?
3. Does this mean that the hasbara crowd gets to determine what can and can’t be seen on Facebook?
4. Does this mean that non-prurient nudity in a cartoon will get it banned?
I’ve looked everywhere for a way to complain to Facebook about this ridiculous decision, but they pretty much avoid telling you how to do so. So I guess we have to make a big enough stink and get the media to call asking questions. Maybe someone can post FB’s corporate headquarters info and phone number and people can call. This is the customer service number I found online: 650-543-4800.
Psst, I’ll tell you a little secret: while Mysh can’t display this image on Facebook, guess who can? You, of course. It’s on my page. If enough of us put it up on all our pages it will hopefully drive the Thought Police crazy and maybe they’ll give up on the censorship. Post it to Twitter too and all the social media. Let’s frustrate the hell out of the censor and make them realize their folly.
The other two censored images are The Green Sabra (a parody of The Hulk, in which the hero/monster is a Sabra) and The Real $uperpower, in which corporate CEO Lex Luther carves an “S” on a naked, cowed Superman (the 99%) in a biting affirmation of the message of the Occupy Wall Street movement. I dare anyone to defend the censoring of these images. Even the most pro-Israel among you. Go ahead, I dare you to try.
Oh and about that falling stock price: Facebook, don’t you have enough troubles without adding this to the bunch? But I guess the nannies are factoring in the possibility of kvetching and moaning from the pro-Israel side as well. It’s a question of which will hurt them more. So far, art, freedom and free expression are the losers.
UPDATE: Mysh posted on his Facebook page yesterday that the company sent him an “automatic” message saying his art work had been removed “in error.” It’s now been restored to his page, a victory of freedom of expression for social media. Now, onward to freeing Uri Blau from the burden of espionage charges!
UPDATE I: Not so fast. Facebook screwed up again and has banned yet another of Mysh’s works and this time suspended him from access to his site for THREE days!! Once I know the offending image I’ll feature it here and encourage all of you to engage in social media disobedience on his behalf. The struggle continues!
RE: “In recent days, Facebook suspended the account of the Israeli graphic artist, Mysh… It seems that some of the brilliant political graphics I praised in that post must’ve offended the delicate sensibilities of the pro-Israel crowd.” ~ R.S.
SEE: Foxman says Google and Facebook are on his team to combat ‘internet hate’ by Philip Weiss, Mondoweiss, 5/13/12
ENTIRE ARTICLE – http://mondoweiss.net/2012/05/foxman-says-google-and-facebook-are-on-his-team-to-combat-internet-hate.html
Seems that this is not the first “anti-Semitic” cartoon censorship in Facebook:
Occupy Tampa posts anti-Semitic cartoon on Holocaust Day Israeli right wing made much “sound” when a Egyptian Christian Teen was jailed for Facebook Cartoon. Heh.
The world obviously needs a non-Jewish controlled social media. Israelis are so eager to link Zuckerman’s Facebook to Israel that they even officially change their names to Mark Zuckerman. And on the state level: Israel tells Facebook: Remove Intifada page Hmmmm which state will demand the removing of the Israeli Jewish over militaristic and nationalistic aggressive Facebook pages?
Israel is now planing to make a law criminalizing the usage of the Nazi and Holocaust symbols. Haven’t the Palestinians an equal right to criminalize the usage of the Star of David which is constantly used in the Jewish hate graffiti on Mosques and other buildings. Strange that Israeli law has allowed Jews to write “Gas the Arabs” and “Kill the Arabs” with a Star of David without no legal consequences. And on the same time Israelis make enormous sound of every swastika painted on Jewish property around the world.
I don’t think they banned him. His Facebook page is still up and the graphic is still there. Maybe there was another temporary issue with the account?
They suspended his account as punishment for 24 hrs & the cartoons are gone from his page. He was warned that future violations would cause his account to be permanently cancelled and for him to be banned.
I made a conscious decision to avoid facebook and other so
called “social media”. This latest flap hasn’t altered my decision in any way. Social media will ALWAYS be determined by the lowest common denominator.
Richard, can you translate the tats on the hulk for those of us who don’t know Hebrew?
I visited the Mysh FB page and could not find this particular cartoon just as you described. So up on my FB page it goes.
What a talented guy. What has happened to political cartoons in the US? They used to be everywhere and now it’s hard to find them.
For translation, see Richard’s earlier post regarding this cartoon:
https://www.richardsilverstein.com/2012/05/28/mysh-israeli-visual-artists-profound-meditation-on-jewish-suffering-psychic-trauma-and-israeli-racism/
I have a FB page I never use: How do I post something? Thanks.
Click on Photo & upload an image of the Mysh graphic to your FB page.
Just another proof that FB has integrated well into mainstream media which is by and large either vetted by Hasbara operatives or self-censored to avoid their wrath.
Prophetic comments by two eminent Jews:
Lessing J. Rosenwald, president of the American Council for Judaism, 1944: “The concept of a racial state – the Hitlerian concept – is repugnant to the civilized world, as witness the fearful global war in which we are involved. . . , I urge that we do nothing to set us back on the road to the past. To project at this time the creation of a Jewish state or commonwealth is to launch a singular innovation in world affairs which might well have incalculable consequences.”
Albert Einstein, who also opposed the creation of a Jewish state, 1939: “There could be no greater calamity than a permanent discord between us and the Arab people. Despite the great wrong that has been done us, we must strive for a just and lasting compromise with the Arab people…. Let us recall that in former times no people lived in greater friendship with us than the ancestors of these Arabs.”
Sigh. The same thing happens to “pro Israel” FB accounts all the time. Anyone can flag a comment or a graphic as offensive and if enough people do so in a certain brief period of time, then the account can be banned. If it’s a first offense, it’s brief and impermanent and the “offender” is given a warning. This system leaves the policing to the “community” and it is completely ideologically and politically neutral. “Hasbarah operatives” don’t vet anything, and whatever such operatives exist, they’re just not very good. For instance, the Red Hot Chili Peppers are scheduled to perform in Tel Aviv on Sept. 10th. Now go do a Google search for “Red Hot Chili Peppers Israel.” You’ll see that the first two results are facebook groups dedicated to pressuring the RHCP to cancel the show. Of the 12 non-sponsored results on the first page, 6 call on the band to boycott. Where are the $15 million Hasbarah warriors?? If they exist, they totally suck.
Of course the policing isn’t “ideologically” or “politically neutral.” The policing is ideologically-charged since the “community” members are basing their campaigns against specific members on their own ideological prejudices. But ultimately the decision on suspension is NOT directed by the community, but by staff who receive the complaints review the material & decide whether or not to ban.
I’ve never heard of pro Israel FB accounts being suspended. Do you have any example of an account & what material was deemed offensive. In fact, I’ve seen numerous far right sites which call for hanging Israeli Palestinian MKs not suspended in any way.
You’re comparing apples to oranges. We’re not talking Red Hot Chili Peppers here. We’re talking an artist whose graphic, controversial artistic statement was banned.
[my God, you want to pimp a story by that corrupt thief & scumbag Ronn Torosian?? Not on your life, not here, not ever.]
I was pimping the photo array. The message.
I don’t even know who Ronn Torosian is.
Torosian helped steal a few million from followers of an Israeli miracle rabbi when the former was soliciting/pimping for Rep. Michael Grimm. He’s also PR pimped for lots of pro-Israel far right projects like Clarion Fund & others. An odious fellow.
The assault of the refugees in Tel Aviv wasn’t covered to any appreciable extent in the western media. There’s apparently a concerted effort to keep the whole thing quiet, including the spread of political cartoons on social media. You can’t convince me there isn’t zionist influence in the media, including Facebook. Like Richard, I’ve never heard of any pro-Israel group or page being banned or deleted, but there have been many pro-Palestine pages, including the Third Intifada page, which were taken down by Facebook.
I tweeted to Jodi Rudoren, who usually responds to my tweets, aking why she missed the T.A. riots story: no answer.
I posted a link to your blog on my Facebook page. The image appeared for a millisecond and then disappeared – Facebook must have some pretty good software. I then tried to post the cartoon separately as a screen dump – as of this moment the entire post has disappeared.
Sounds like a glitch. Reg. I posted the link on my wall this morning and had no problems.
This comes down to individuals, not institutions. Time to stop blaming groups.
It is very easy for the hasbara to plant a Facebook moderator. They did this for a long time with other major online discussion groups and areas. There are extensive Youtubes, some even made by the IDF, about the online hasbara units. There is even some testimony by former shills, with extensive details as to how the operations worked (compelling as you can see the methods he describes being employed to a near tee in a nuanced manner online).
Facebook is also an Israeli tool. Its leader, Zucky, was long ago pressured to kowtow. If you didn’t see the virulent anti-Goyism raising to new heights based on his mere marriage to someone he knew actually loved him for more than money (and gave him the time of day when he didn’t have it), then you should pay attention to the Facebook co-owners. Eduardo Saverin is as Brazilian as Rupert Murdoch is Australian. These are internationalists using nationalism and religion to disguise deceitful activity. They’re not all up in social media because it suddenly became a trend. Nope. It became a trend when the media said it did. ALL of the major functions of Facebook were already around in the form of America Online (AND with a real chat community to boot, on top of forums, customized profiles, away messages (status updates), etc.) before that “WWW” button showed up and provided Steve Case’s clients with the necessary exit corridor to something bigger and newer.
They’re into social media because you tell a story about everything you’re doing. Google+ asks you different biographical information than Facebook. Oh, it’s all for $$$. Yes, all for $$$. And $$$=power. So profit is not our God in America. Let’s not forget!
btw, there are shills all over your site. You probably give raison d’etre to a good amount of hasbara units. They owe you commission.
“These are internationalists using nationalism and religion to disguise deceitful activity”
Wow, here we have the genuine stuff ! Someone who’s read too much “The Protocols….” ? You’re sure Zuckerberg & that “pseudo-Brazilian” guy aren’t communists too ?
“Internationalists”, that’s sounds great to me. I would love to tear down ALL borders.
Bolshevism versus Zionism was never a headline? I’m not going to argue with you. I’m right; you’re not researched.
btw, the credits for that headline go to one Rt. Hon. Winston S. Churchill. 😉
Hmm, can you provide links to those Utubes, especially with the former shills? I am pursuing a bit of research on what makes a shill sing for peanuts, and how effective it is. Also, do you know of aHasbara shill who ever recanted (as in changed his mind due to the discourse he was having)?
I do not subscribe to any of the so-called social media: Aside from the inherently narcissistic content requiring suspension of disbelief, is the ongoing threat to one’s security.
At the risk of inspiring accusations:
Hmm wrote “Facebook is also an Israeli tool. Its leader, Zucky, was long ago pressured to kowtow.”
Mary wrote ” You can’t convince me there isn’t zionist influence in the media, including Facebook.”
Yankel wrote “Just another proof that FB has integrated well into mainstream media which is by and large either vetted by Hasbara operatives or self-censored to avoid their wrath.”
This is all really too much. I can just go to Stormfront if I wanted to read nonsense like this.
Right now, should you want to, you could enjoy facebook pages like F*ck Israel, BDS Movement, Israel Apartheid Week and scads of other similar pages in multiple languages including أنا أول متطوع فى الجيش المصرى فى حال إعلان الحرب على إسرائيل – I am the first volunteer in the Egyptian Army in the event of a declaration of war on Israel. I took me all of 2 minutes to find these and there are a lot more! So much for Zionist control of the media.
Honestly, I am surprised some of these comments haven’t been moderated, or have elicited some kind of response from our host.
As for “pro-Israel” facebook presences that have received warnings or have been outright deleted, just check out JIDF. In that case, I totally agree as the head of the organization is to the right of Meir Kahane.
Pea, it’s not nonsense. I have a friend who is a journalist working for a major US newspaper and who lost her job for writing a story criticizing Israel.
You’re saying that Facebook should censor everything that isn’t sympathetic or worshipping Israel? There is something that shouldn’t be mentioned about BDS, apartheid, and Arab anger against Israel? Finding Facebook pages doesn’t mean there is no zionist influence on the media. Facebook doesn’t affect other websites, newspapers, magazines and television, last time I checked.
Sure, you’ll find those pages. But you’ll also find one hell of a lot of pages hating Muslims, Arabs, Palestinians. Every day a new one is created. Let’s not forget the recent bus accident that resulted in the deaths of many Palestinian children, and the hundreds of comments from Israelis applauding this tragedy and wishing it would happen every day.
As for JIDF, they’re notoriously racist and for that reason they should be kept off Facebook. No wonder they received warnings.
I agree with Pea,
Mary
I have a friend who is a journalist working for a major US newspaper and who lost her job for writing a story criticizing Israel.
Mary, you are correct, but going to the other extreme is not the solution. If you cannot see the likes of ‘Hmmm’ are detrimental to our cause, it’s a shame. the Palestinians deserver better than this surely? Truth is ugly enough, we don’t need conspiracies.
There is a way to expose the truth without resorting to conspiracies like the JIDF and and the Zionist right wing are do. It’s no co-incidence that every low life cause is attracted to Zionist right wingers,
It goes both ways. Jew-haters are drawn to the Palestinian cause too, not because they give a fig about Palestine but because they simply hate Jews.
Weeding these people out is next to impossible, unfortunately. But I am not understanding your objections to what “Hmmm” is saying.
Mary,
But I am not understanding your objections to what “Hmmm” is saying.
Outing out those individuals who indulge in what you say, (and yes it does go on) is OK, using the collective to smear their co-religionists is not.
That would be like me holding you as a Christian (from your name i’m presuming you are) responsible for the Crusades, and what Bush is doing. Bush did say in an unguarded moment that the war on Terror has to be called that, because if he called it Christianity V Islam, Christianity would lose.
Thus, since he was a head of state, if we used the collective, we could say, ‘Christians declared a war against Islam’. But of course that’s riduculous.
‘Hmmm’ is using sweeping generalisations, and in some ways though without realising it, you are too, when you mentioned Hollywood making films about the Holocaust and not many about the Nakba. The simple answer to that, is that nobody is stopping any Arab or Muslim making a film about the Nakba. Nobody is stopping any Christian from making a film about any Christian Holocausts like the Armenian one or the Bolshevik one against Christians.
” nobody is stopping any Arab or Muslim making a film about the Nakba.” How do you know that? Do you know who decides which films get financial backing, which ones are actually made, and which ones are distributed?
Just as African American filmmakers struggled for many years for equality in Hollywood, Arabs have the same problem.
Your simple answer is just that.
And by the way, I am not a Christian. I am a Muslim.
If Arabs wanted to become film producers (& I presume some have) they could, and could make films about Nakba or whatever. Of course they’d have to make films people want to see & which make money. Money talks in Hollywood as elsewhere.
At first, Hollywood didn’t believe or understand that films by & about African Americans could make money. But once Spike Lee & others broke through Hollywood followed suit. It’s a brutal, tough game, which is why people new to it often don’t bother.
Amazing how Chayma – who claims to be a Muslim – can be so ignorant of power-relations and happily states that “nobody is stopping you from making a film-blahblah”.
Well, this is something that I’ve been interested in for a long time, and have tons of things to say about but I’d rather let professor Jack Shaheen, specialist in mass media and who’s been doing research in racial and ethnic stereotyping for many years, state the point.
Here’s his great documentary: “Reel Bad Arabs: How Hollywood Vilifies a People” (he also clearly makes the link between the Zionist lobby in Hollywood and the stereotyping of Arabs): it’s really a MUST
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DmVoSZk_fvo
Here’s a great speech at the American University in Beirut by Jack Shaheen, largely covering the topic of the film but it goes further as he includes post 9/11, and he’s referring to an American politician who confirms the direct link between Pentagone and Hollywood.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XlbXorXEFT0
When the great French-Greek film instructor Costa-Gavras made “Hanna K” back in 1972, I think, with Mohammad Bakri – the first international film where the Nakba has a central role (it’s on the net, at a certain moment you see Bakri wandering around in an abandoned Palestinian village) – the Zionist lobby did everything possible to prevent the film from being scheduled, and they actually were successful in many places. Costa-Gavras has never spoken directly about it himself, but his wife has stated that he was deeply hurt, and he has never touched the Palestinian issue since.
Julian Schnabel also had problems when he produced “Miral”, the book written by Palestinian Rula Jebreal. Vanessa Redgrave was blacklisted for a long time in Hollywood for being pro-Palestinian etc etc.There are so many cases confirming this.
I simply find Chayma’s statement just as incredible as if a African-American states that there’s no bias about his community.
I would like also to mention the case of Sacha Baron-Cohen and his disgusting films based on ethnic stereotyping. Sacha Baron-Cohen is an English-Israeli Jew who in ALL his films has made fun of other ethnic groups, in the new one “the Dictator”, he’s just continuing the Hollywood vilifying of Arabs. We all know that if an Arab made a film stereotyping Jews in the way Baron-Cohen stereotypes Arabs, the film would never be scheduled anywhere.
In his film “Bruno”, he exploited a Palestinian Christian activist who was told he was being interviewed for a documentary, and finally he was presented as a “terrorist” in that thug’s film.
http://www.electronicintifada.net/content/sacha-baron-cohen-buffoonish-ideologue-israels-service/11333
(there’s a link to an article in ‘The Guardian’ about Ayman Abu Aita suing Sacha Baron-Cohen)
Here’s Dean Obeidallah, American-Palestinian stand-up comic on “Sacha Cohen’s movie a mistrel show”
http://www.edition.cnn.com/2012/05/11/opinion/obeidallah-sacha-cohen-movie/index.html
Chayma, pea: what is happening in the MSM in the US is glaring due to its absence. You can call it “going to extremes” all you want but most television channels and a large number of news outlet have to tow the Israeli line, or sink into abject silence (a few notable occasional examples notwithstanding). Take MSNBC as you exhibit A. Because anything to do with Israel is unmentionable, almost any mention of foreign policy has become all but extinct. You can see that as lowest common denominator, or the dictates of the democratic party that has decreed that MSNBC is to be the official re-elect Obama tool, much as Fox hews to the GOP line. Israel and the requirement to be an all-out supporter to the point of reading from AIPAC script is what every congressman must do or else. The pathetic towing of the line by Elizabeth Warren as an aspiring senator is just one example among too many to mention.
The near-complete take-over of the MSM and the US congress is no conspiracy theory since it is totally transparent. The attempts to get internet providers, hosts, social media and blogs to pay homage to the official line are well documented but the lines in the sand remain to be drawn – which is what will come next, surely. Again, merely a straight line drawn from place A to place B. For how that’s done, I bring you dailyKos as Exhibit B (a place I never frequent any longer – what is it good for anyways?).
As for what kind of friends Palestinians need, they are ultimately their own best friends and I prefer to let them speak for themselves, without being dictated to what friends they should and shouldn’t have. In light of the horrible things happening to them as we speak, they, of all people, should be the ones to judge what barbarities israel and its “friends” outside are capable of. Just ask them.
Dana and Deir Yassin: Great comments, bless you both.
Well it is no accident that Jews own and/or control so much of the Western world’s media companies. Besides it was a rather good business (until recent years) it gave control over public opinions and governmental policies.
One example from Finland. The Swedish Bonnier Group (operates in 17 countries), owned by Bonnier family (Jewish), bought about 7 years ago the most popular commercial TV-channel of Finland MTV3. Soon after the takeover the channel aired on the best spectator time a unbelievable uncritical documentary of Israeli snippers and their “heroic work”. What was extraordinary that normally that time was reserved for most popular series and films. Anyway the Israeli documentary with its live killings and racist bragging raised so many eyebrows here, that the test ended there. After that the channel has in its news service offered the Finnish public a rather insignificant and positive reporting of the Israeli Palestinian situation. News of Palestine are for example: European airlines chancel tickets of the Palestine-activists. And from Israel: Israel banned to thin photo models. Relevant isn’t it?
When Aftonbladet published the story of Israeli organ harvesting some time ago the Bonnier Group’s different newspapers and tv channels were extremely active in the furious counter attack.
It is self-delusion to try to convince, that the ethnic/religious background of the media’s owners has no place in the policies of what the media publishes or “hides” from the public. Of course most of the Jews who own and lead different media companies use their instruments to portray Israel in the best light and deny the publishing of negative news.
I find this distasteful, beside the point & anti-Semitic. You’ve bee commenting here for so many years, I didn’t think you would publish such nonsense. Please don’t go there again. I will not permit anti-Semitic tropes here.
Jews have diverse attitudes toward Israel & to attribute slavish support of Israel to “Judaism” or Jewishness is distasteful.
Richard, what you say is true. But, also, how about a sense check before calling anyone an anti-Semite?
Why can you not accept that Judaism has a corrupt form of political fundamentalism? It is the Al Qaeda to the Islam, or the KKK/Pat Hagee to the Christianity, etc.
Today, you cannot say the media is not influenced by private owners who favor Israel. Whether or not this was by design is a debate, but not one that toes the anti-Semitic line.
I do believe anti-Semitism would be a hatred borne out of people being Jewish rather than a hatred for people’s actions and a noticeable similarity that they are Jewish (probably a prereq for supporting Israel if you aren’t a “Christian” cuckoo or corrupt “Muslim”). Above, the person lists actions, notes that there is a common motive and modus operandi, and then is labeled anti-Semite. Were his statements inaccurate? Were they non-factual? If so, then maybe you have something. But you, yourself, claim this person has a history that would tell you otherwise.
BTW, the hasbara has playbooks on how to get people kicked out from forums, divide and conquer strategies, etc. Since 2009, they have added a few tabs to the Hasbara playbook. You probably have sensed this. Don’t give these trolls a goat to eat.
Of course Judaism can be corrupt, violent, intolerant & homicidal. I’ve written this regularly about the settlers. But they no more represent “Judaism” or mainstream Judaism than the Taliban represent “Islam” or mainstream Islam. My objection is to using the name of a religion without distinction to represent violent or hatred. Saying Jews control the media & censor Israel discourse because they are Jewish is offensive. First, the ways in which they cover Israel in their publications have more to do with their ideas about Zionism & Israel than they do about “Judaism.” Second, don’t attribute Judaism as a whole to their actions.
All you have to do to find a pro-Israel newspaper is look at the New York Times, who only recently replaced Ethan Bronner as its middle eastern bureau head even though Bronner’s son is serving in the Israeli army.
It may be distasteful to attribute pro-Israel bias in the media to the fact that Jews own and run many major news outlets – but it’s not farfetched. It’s even true in Hollywood – how many films have been made about the holocaust? And then compare, how many have been made about the Nakba? And why are Arabs so consistently demonized in films and television?
Negative ideas about Arabs & Muslims abound in western & U.S. culture. It’s not a function specifically of Jews or Judaism that these views exist. Many of us acknowledge them & fight against them.
Oh good grief Mary. Arthur Ochs Sulzberger Jr. who runs the NYT has some Jewish background but he was raised Episcopalian by his Mother after his parents divorced when he was 5. His own marriage in 1975 was officiated by a Presbyterian minister. Does that sound very Jewish to you? There is no indication that he identifies himself as Jewish. So why would his “Jewishness” affect his newspaper empire’s reporting regarding Israel? Unless it’s a racial imperative I guess, because he doesn’t practice or identify as a Jew.
Pea, did you miss all the controversy over the NY Times’ appointing Ethan Bronner to head the middle eastern bureau while his son was serving in the IDF? There was a serious question of conflict of interest which, as I recall, was discussed extensively here on Richard’s blog. It was also discussed everywhere on the internet, so it seemed. So it doesn’t matter whether anyone is Jewish or not – it matters whether they are a zionist. The owner of the NY Times may or may not be Jewish, who cares anyway, but he may very well be a supporter of Israel. Over the years I’ve been reading the NY Times, I’ve seen plenty of pro-Israel bias in its coverage.
That’s precisely why I’m uncomfortable with the notion that religion is what makes people hate Arabs. I don’t think it’s religion or at least not the Jewish religion as I practice it. Rather, it’s certain notions about Israel & Zionism. Jews who have no knowledge or interest in the Jewish religion can still be Arab-hating pro-settler thugs.
And the right wing Zionists will tell you that the bias is in favor of the Palestinians. Never mind that the NYT has won more Pullitzer prizes than any other publication, that it is considered the paper of record etc. etc. Ethan Bronner is gone. Having a child in the IDF means little. Are you going to question say, David Grossman’s bona fides as a critic of the occupation because all three of his children serve/served in the IDF, as did he? Guess what, it’s entirely possible to be Jewish and/or Israeli and/or a Zionist and be critical of the occupation. I’ll just repeat what Richard said and leave it at that “Jews have diverse attitudes toward Israel & to attribute slavish support of Israel to “Judaism” or Jewishness is distasteful.”
David Grossman’s criticism of the Occupation is not much more profound than Peter Beinart’s. Grossman, like Beinart is a liberal Zionist. A very eloquent, incisive liberal Zionist, but liberal Zionist nonetheless. Grossman, if he had a choice, would be happy to be rid of the Palestinians so Israel could get on with being a Jewish state. To him, the Palestinians are a after thought at best. Being critical of the Occupation isn’t enough I’m afraid. There are millions of Israeli who are, but it hasn’t been enough to change anything.
Oh boy, here comes the race card.
*cues Benny Hill Music*
Somewhere above, Pea tried to contextualise me into the Elders of Zion, arguing I and my ilk should be moderated or, at least, reprimanded for suggesting mainstream media was self-censoring to avoid Israeli wrath.
Many years ago — long before electronic mail and media took dominance — a young Jewish friend, active within the local community, told me about putting pen to paper in a letters-to-the-editor campaign, following an article or news item regarding Israel in the local newspaper. Those subscribed to the paper — nearly every household, I guess — were urged to wield the non-renewal stick.
Some years later — still in the era of mostly printed media — a local friend, a hard-science university professor, told me of a letter or an article critical of the US he had sent to a popular national, somewhat left-leaning, weekly. Having been disappointed with it never being published, he pulled some ropes (we’re talking a small country here) to ask an editor how comes. He was surprised to find out it all had to do with a by-the-by mentioning of Israel. Being unkind to Israel, he was told, would often provoke a wave of hostile letters to the editor threatening non-renewals the publication could hardly afford.
Some time ago, having read a ME-related article on CNN, I posted a short comment, correcting some factual inaccuracy. It’s been removed in no time. With the comment being very milechdik (=mild, for you gentiles) and the facts mentioned easily verifiable, this removal annoyed me to the point of reposting it, just to see it vanishing again. Noticing plenty of foul-language, openly antisemitic comments, it dawned on me that this might be a subtle, sinister way of pre-empting criticism. Seeing the type and level of those criticising Israel, one wouldn’t like to be associated with that lot.
Now be patient.
(a) With the dismantling of colonialism, some centuries-old ethnically European communities “repatriated” to Europe.
(b) Many comprehensive ME peace plans — at least those remotely acceptable to Israel — mitigate the highly explosive right-of-return by provisions for resettling Palestinian diaspora-refugees in Canada, Europe or Australia.
To make things clear, I don’t think sending Israeli Jews back to Europe is a good idea or at anyone’s interest (Palestinians included), but — considering (a) and (b) above — neither would I brand it unthinkably illegitimate.
Nevertheless, when a grand old lady, a very highly regarded journalist, an institute by her own right, dared to privately suggest just that, she was promptly tarred, feathered and sent packing, never to be allowed into mainstream media ever again.
I hope I made my point.
Just in case I didn’t, take a look at the first photo in the following link and ask yourself how come it’s never seen light in a more mainstream medium:
http://mondoweiss.net/2012/01/israeli-soldiers-drive-tractor-over-workers-legs-to-stop-palestinians-from-building-a-house-on-their-occupied-lands.html
Yankel, that photo appeared in the Jan 26th edition of the International Herald Tribune, which is published by the NYT (See Mary?). The caption read “A Palestinian construction worker screamed in pain Wednesday after he tried to block an Israeli Army driver who drove a trailer over his legs near Hebron” The Washington Post ran the story too and the photo in color. The image also appeared on the Web sites of the Wall Street Journal, MSNBC and the Guardian.
I’ll just assume you’re terribly misinformed and not a very good researcher.
I will assume that the caption was very biased. It’s obvious that the message is, that guy deserved to get run over because he tried to block a truck.” Any mention as to why he might have been trying to block the truck? You left that part out, which is many times what mainstream media does.
Pea, I have long been aware of who owns both the NYT and IHT. What is your point?
You implied that the NYT is owned/controlled by Jews. It isn’t.
There’s no way to justify a truck driver running over a man’s legs, especially when the accompanying photo shows the man writhing in pain. The accompanying story mentioned that the army was confiscating Palestinian construction equipment. I don’t see how any of the distorts the situation at all. Nothing was hidden by these mainstream media sources. I don’t really understand what you’re saying. In any case, I’m sure you have better examples of media bias than the really poor one provided by Yankel. Feel free to share and then we can talk productively. How’s that sound?
We’re not going to do it here. Richard can also give you plenty of examples, Pea. We can start with the massacre of human rights activists on the Mavi Marmara 2 years ago. Go back in Richard’s archives and you’ll find where he writes about the poor and consistently pro-Israel coverage of the tragedy.
A terrible researcher I might well be.
I’ll assume you’re defending an even worse case as you go for the poor example rather than argument.
(btw, would you care to provide the links?)
Yankel, that last point was presented as your final coup de grace. And it was wrong. You just took what you read in Mondoweiss as Gospel. As for links, I provided you with publications and dates. Go practice your research skills and prove me wrong.
You wrote “I’ll assume you’re defending an even worse case…”
I don’t even know what that means. I can’t speak to most of what you wrote because it’s anecdotal and really doesn’t prove anything at all. As for your reference to Helen Thomas, her comment wasn’t private – it was made in front of a non-hidden camera. And it seemed a tad intemperate: “Get the hell out of Palestine” – let alone grossly impolitic. She suggested the forcible relocation of Jews in Israel to Poland and Germany. That’s kind of grotesque. Who would want to work with her again after that. What Press Secretary would ever call on her during a White House Press conference? She blabbed herself out of a job. It would be like suggesting that African Americans be relocated against their will to Africa. Such a suggestion would bestow upon you well deserved instant pariah status. Does that answer your question Yankeleh?
As I wrote elsewhere on this blog a couple of days ago: Helen Thomas didn’t say anything different from what many American politicians are saying when it comes to the Palestinians: that they belong in Jordan.
African-Americans were brought to the Americas as slaves, have been there far longer than the Jews (excluding the Jews of the Old Yichuv) who settled down in Palestine. The African-Americans didn’t come with the intention of taking over the land, expel the Natives (the Whites took care of that, even worse), and set up a Yoruba or Mandinka Kingdom. The comparison is really poor.
Personally I’m not asking any Jews to leave (except Lieberman, Edelstein, Michaeli….) but I have no moral problems stating that Israeli Jews who don’t think Palestinian refugees AND their descendants have the right to return home, should leave themselves. Do you find this statement problematic ?
Concerning the media, let’s talk again the day the NYT’s journalist in Jerusalem has a son enrolled in a Fatah-affiliated military organization, and see how you feel. And don’t forget that Ethan Bronner lived on top of a house that belonged to the Karmi family before ’48 ….
Some of the best French journalists is Israel are/were Jewish: Sylvain Cypel for ‘Libération’ who lived in Israel as a kid (as you’re Frenck-speaking I recommend his fantastic book: “Les Emmurés” [The Walled-In], Pierre Haski also for “Libération” and particularly Charles Enderlin, French-Israeli (cf. the Muhammad Durrah-story) who’s been the correspondent for the French national television for 30 years. Still, they simply can’t tell the Palestinian side of the story, and I know only a few people in the West – AIPAC, ADL, CRIF included – would accept the reverse situation: the same amount of Arab/Muslim journalists covering the conflict as the actual amount of Jews and hardly no Jews. Be honest about that at least. I know very well how the organized Zionists have tried to shut up critical voices, and “being an Arab” – if you’re not Khaled Abu Toameh – is a major suspicion.
I think my comment is too long.
The comparison to African Americans was admittedly facile. The issue was more the effects of pariah status. As for American politicians who say that Palestinians should go to Jordan a) It’s not the same as saying Jews should go to Europe for dozens of readily apparent reasons and b) Two wrongs don’t make a right.
Deïr Yassin asked: “I have no moral problems stating that Israeli Jews who don’t think Palestinian refugees AND their descendants have the right to return home, should leave themselves. Do you find this statement problematic?”
Depends. Should leave or ought to be forced to leave against their will? People ought to be allowed to believe whatever they want to believe. As to the scope of the right of return, I leave that to the relevant parties to negotiate, but I do believe that, at the very least, anyone who has been unfairly deprived of their property ought to be compensated for such by the party that benefited.
As to the NYT hiring a reporter whose son is in a Fatah-affiliated military organization – I wouldn’t care. Being Muslim or an Arab, with an adult son serving in an Army ought not automatically exclude you from reporting from Israel. The same applies in the Jewish scenario you suggested.
And I’m sorry, I refuse to acknowledge the existence of a non existent Zionist/Jew owned/controlled media.
The best explanation of the question I’ve seen yet:
http://mondoweiss.net/2008/02/do-jews-dominat.html
Hi Richard, new to your blog. Fantastic post! It’s good when people are shown their real image in the mirror occasionally..
Richard said “That’s precisely why I’m uncomfortable with the notion that religion is what makes people hate Arabs. I don’t think it’s religion or at least not the Jewish religion as I practice it”
YES! I know of a case where Arabs are simply a substitute for the Germans who conducted the holocaust and are gone. The hate must be exercised against some present party and the Arabs fill the bill. The person of whom I speak is Jewish but I have never heard a word about any relationship with the religion or seen even the slightest evidence of it being practiced. Though synagogue is attended, all I’ve ever heard is criticism of the rabbi for being too peace oriented.