Muslim and Jewish Women in Nazareth

'We can live in peace'...John Lennon (photo: Dafna Tal)

Mahzor

Mahzor

New York Public Library

Churches

Sarajevo Haggadah

Mah Nishtanah

Sarajevo haggadah

Antaea Darom

Israeli women's art

Action

Torah as music

Ben Heine

Action

ceramic bowl

Mohammad Said Kalash, "Offering Reconciliation" exhibit (photo: Ilan Amihai)

Action

Punch and Judy/Pinchas and Jamila

Avi Katz

Action

David Grossman

Ben Heine

Action

Eldrige Street shul

Lower East Side

Action

Dove

Ben Heine

Action

Two birds

Hoda Jamal

Action

Israeli and Palestinian boys

from documentary, Promises

Action

Cat in the Hat

Yiddish version

Action

Daylight through the Wall

Banksy: graffiti art on Separation Wall

Action

Maurice Sendak's Brundibar set

New Victory Theater (photo: Nan Melville/NYT)

Action

Daniel Barenboim, West-Eastern Divan Orchestra

Palestinian-Israeli musical ensemble (photo: Kerstin Joensson/AP)

Action

Great Day on Eldrige Street

N.Y.'s klezmer greats celebrate shul rededication (photo: Leo Sorel)

Action

Joint Appeal for Peace

(Avi Katz)

Joint Appeal for Peace

Ketubah, Ancona, Italy (1772)

(Jewish Theological Seminary library)

Ancona ketubah

Noa Does a ‘Benny Morris,’ Calls Hamas ‘Nazi-Like’

Mira Awad and Noa (photo: Ronen Ackerman)

Mira Award and Noa (photo Ronen Ackerman)

Noa is about to represent Israel along with Israeli Arab performer, Mira Awad, in the Eurovision song contest. Until recently, the Israeli Sephardic vocalist had an impeccable musical and political reputation both within Israel and abroad.  Among other things, she’d performed a stirring collaboration with Cheb Khaled covering John Lennon’s Imagine.

But more recently, she made extremely controversial remarks attacking Hamas, accusing it of mass rape, and blaming it for the Gaza war.  After that outburst, she was forced to cancel a Tel Aviv concert appearance with Awad because she stirred up great animosity among progressive Jews and Arabs.

Subsequently, she modified her remarks and apologized for their harshness.  But Mary Rizzo brings word that Noa’s apology was neither sincere nor lasting.  She’s back on the warpath and what she says isn’t pretty:

A few words about the Israeli elections and where things stand now, from my point of view:

Though i voted left, as always, I am not surprised by the results of the Israeli elections.

I am proud to live in a democratic country which has given voice to the people, even when i am unhappy with the result. I am proud to say that the ONLY party that was ever deemed illegal in Israel was KACH, lead by Kahana, the fanatic Jewish right wing party. Raam and Tal , two Arab parties who support Iran and refuse to recognize Israel as a homeland for the Jews, who don’t even make their party’s declaration of principles available in Hebrew, are kept in the Knesset. They are PROTECTED by the Israeli supreme court.

The Israeli election results, however saddening, were obvious, amongst other things, in the face of the INCREDIBLE propaganda spread around the world by the ENORMOUS amount of Anti-Semites and Jew- haters who are bent on destroying Israel. When the Israeli population sees the lies spread around, the hypocrisy of the world who sees Israel as the aggressor rather than a country acting in self defence, a world whose eyes are blind to the killing and the massacres by the MUSLIM fanatics of the Palestinian people, of Fatah, of women who dare to raise their head, of ANYONE who does not agree with them, when the Israeli people who number 7 million, 1.5 million of them Arabs, see around them 1.5 BILLION Arabs, with hardly ONE voice raised in peace, compared to the ENDLESS Israeli and Jewish voices raised in peace, then it is clear that the elections will go right.

…Meretz, a very sane and liberal left wing organization who supports 2 states for 2 people, has supported both of Israel’s operations, in Lebanon and Gaza. Of course they have, because Meretz know very well that Israel was acting in self defence against fanatic, cruel, Nazi-like organizations, the Hamas and Hezbollah, who are holding innocent people captive, Arabs and Jews as one, and using them as human shields in their death-loving Jihad.

…Both sides have failed to make peace, and now both sides have become more extreme, especially the Muslim side. Fortunately, Lieberman and his friends, which i care nothing for, can never compete with the death loving fanatics on the other side.

All the best

Noa

I’m sorry to say that Noa has done a “Benny Morris” on us. Like that New Historian and former progressive who turned against his former liberal beliefs to become as anti-Arab as the most noxious of Israeli politicians, Noa has taken leave of her intellect and her senses.  To call Hamas “Nazi-like” is truly worthy of Morris or other rightist ideologues like Daniel Pipes or Bibi Netanyahu.  Yet she trumpets her “leftist” credentials as if this excuses her Islamophobia.

Further, Hamas is a “death-loving fanatic” while Lieberman is–what?  A minor irritation and annoyance?  This is beyond pathetic.  Why is it that someone who claims she is a fearless champion of peace is so incredibly defensive and protective of her own nation as if the world was composed of enemies besetting it on all sides?  Why is it that the blame falls on the other side and never on hers?  Why is it that Muslims are at fault and Jews never?  Why do Muslims “love death” while Jews love life?

I’ve got news for Noa: you can’t detest a legitimate representative of the Palestinian people and claim in the same breath that you’re all for peace between Israelis and Palestinians.  What you really mean is that you’re all for peace as long as the Palestinians put forward leaders you like.  If not, then what are you for?  Meaningless platitudes of the type she spouts here.

I’m also sorry to say that she doesn’t seem to have the courage of her convictions either.  It appears she removed this post from her site sometime after Mary Rizzo quoted it.  I wonder what made Noa do that?  If anyone can find this post on her site please post me the link.

She only proves the unfortunate principle that many entertainers would be better off sticking to what they know and leaving to their audience’s imagination what their personal or political beliefs might be.  Sometimes a brilliant performer hides some pretty nasty views and vices.

Noa’s are so puerile, so noxious that I can never write another positive word about her again. I feel deeply sorry for Mira Awad, a perfectly lovely Arab musician and actress who will perform with Noa. This could be a big break for her musical career and she can’t possibly say anything truthful about what she feels about Noa’s anti-Hamas bellowing. Personally, I wish Awad would cancel her participation in the project. But it’s not my career that would suffer so it’s hard to be as judgmental as some on the far-left might be.

I’m sorry to say that voting for Noa in the Eurovision is rewarding her horrible attitudes.  Don’t do it.  As with Waltz With Bashir, I’d prefer she didn’t win despite the fact that she might conceivably have some beneficial impact on peaceful attitudes among both peoples.  Whatever small impact that might be doesn’t warrant endorsing rants like the one above by voting for her.

H/t to Peter Drubetskoy.

Related posts:

  1. Abu Toameh, Jerusalem Post’s ‘House Palestinian,’ Calls for Israel to Talk to Hamas
  2. Dershowitz Accuses Me of Publishing at Neo-Nazi Site
  3. Seattle Muslim Woman Attacked by Neo-Nazi
  4. U.S. Democracy Double-Standard: We Embrace Lieberman, Reject Hamas
  5. Bronner’s Mischaracterization of Hamas Continues

Related posts brought to you by Yet Another Related Posts Plugin.

Tags: , ,

162 Responses to “Noa Does a ‘Benny Morris,’ Calls Hamas ‘Nazi-Like’”

  1. Alex Stein says:

    “Actually your handle should be ‘notabrain’” Does that not break the comment rules regarding ad hominems?

    • I’d say anyone who calls themselves “notabrain” opens themselves up to ridicule.

      As for violating the comment rules, maybe when you show us all you understand them then I’ll address your concerns about my own alleged violations.

  2. Alex Stein says:

    [comment deleted for violation of comment rules]

  3. Alex Stein says:

    My apologies – I hadn’t seen the rule about staying on-topic.

    Now can you explain why you used an ad hominem against one of the posters?

    • I hadn’t seen the rule about staying on-topic.

      What about my specific warning to you not to introduce the topic of Gilad Atzmon to the thread? Did you miss that too?

      And come to think of it I’m really ticked off by yr insinuation that because Mary Rizzo agrees with Gilad Atzmon or quotes him in her blog that that means she has no place at this blog. That would make you in favor of censorship.

      There are rules in this blog for commenting. If Mary Rizzo or you or anyone else break them, then I take action. What the hell does Gilad Atzmon have to do with anything? It’s a snarky, over-cute red herring. I’m sorry, Alex but sometimes you act like you’re a hyper-argumentative teenager instead of an adult. Smart undoubtedly. But really must you deliberately attempt to provoke people as you did Mary?

      As for ad hominems–I think commenters who come across as insufferable know-it-alls and yet make the most basic mistakes like not knowing it has no constitution deserve a tweak or two. But just between us, don’t you find the nickname “Notamoron” a tad (unintentionally) humorous? I won’t tell anyone if you do.

      • Mary Rizzo says:

        Well, what matters is that the person claims there is an “Israeli Constitution” when there clearly is not one, so all of the OT or other information I take with a chuckle.

        I hate ill-informed bags of air more than I hate anything. I have no trouble debating anyone on any topic whatsoever, as long as they are able to substantiate any information they give with fact. If they come up with a whale of wrong info like that, how can they be expected to be able to debate with correctness or accuracy. They can’t, full stop.

        I am used to people using sexist, racist, offensive and insinuating comments about me, pulling all kinds of affiliations out of their hat, thinking it is meaningful to the issue at hand. I generally do not accept the provocation. Especially when they think they are coming up with something to try to paint me as anti-semitic. All they have to do, and I dare and double dare them, is to look up Mary Rizzo and Michael Seifert. Yes, I might be probably the only person most of you will know who had an active part in the capture and arrest of a Nazi war criminal. So give it up or get some real argument rather than lies.

        That said, I am proud of my affiliations, and I don’t run the blog that much anymore, in fact, after attempts by a self-labelled Anti Zionist Jew to close it down, which failed miserably, my two closest affiliates opened a News site together with me, http://www.palestinethinktank.com which contains over 50% original content and most of that from Palestinian writers. These two people are Haitham Sabbah and Gilad Atzmon.

        If people have problems with either of them, that is their problem.

  4. Alex Stein says:

    You are the one who called him ‘notabrain’; his original moniker is ‘notamoron’, neither of which sound either clever or funny to me. I think people should be encouraged to stick to their real names on blogs.

  5. [I am beginning to wonder how this thread relates to Noa]

    If Walt said it, he was yanking your chain, for Mearsheimer & Walt are certainly not superrealists.

    They write on page 92 of The Israel Lobby and US Foreign Policy:

    There is no question that Jews suffered greatly from the despicable legacy of anti-Semitism and that Israel’s creation was an appropriate response to a long record of crimes

    I dispose of the this nonsensical belief in Introduction: The Israel Lobby and US Foreign Policy expose the flaws of the book in Freeman, American Naiveté, Israel Lobby.

  6. Mary Rizzo says:

    I checked out the rules, and while I didn’t see the GA rule (maybe you should write one!) I did see that you consider Cactus48 a propaganda site. That surprises me, because while it is hasn’t been updated for ages, it is a pro-Palestinian site that I would not consider “propaganda” like MEMRI or any of the other sites mentioned. Why do you say this about them Richard?

  7. notamoron says:

    Oh, my G-d…I said “constitution” instead of “Declaration of Independence” therefore all my opinions are completely invalid? That would be a fallacious argument, Mary. I chose to use the handle “notamoron” because I felt that that would differentiate me from the other posters, like you. I like to point out that Joachim Martillo thinks that “Jews suffered greatly from the despicable legacy of anti-Semitism” is a “nonsensical belief”. Is there gonna be any moderation against offensive comments like that, Richard? I guess that my grandmother is lying that she lost her whole family in the Holocaust, and barely escaped with her life. I guess my father is lying about how Jews were mistreated in Morocco. Don’t tell either of them though, they are really attached to the lie. Also, the reason I haven’t read “The Israel Lobby” is not because I’m afraid it will upset my “tender sensibilities” but because I don’t really agree with Walt on most of his points, and yes I did hear it was poor scholarship. Am I obligated to read every book? I’m sure I can give you a long list Zionist books that you wouldn’t want to read, I wouldn’t assume that its because they “frightened” you, but rather because you maybe have other things to do. I don’t understand why say there can’t be supper-realists if someone refers to themselves as a super-realist. Statements like that make me assume you don’t understand the definition of realist when it pertains to international relations.

    • Mary Rizzo says:

      That’s correct. You claim there is a constitution, act like anyone in the world can find it online, bla bla bla… Of course it’s untrue and a constitution is a different document than a Declaration of Independence, so if you are the one making such massive errors or simply don’t realise the difference, this does illustrate to me your capacity to participate in a debate with facts and evidence, so yes, it does make your “opinions” worthless to me. I correct that, you are entitled to your opinions, as wrong as they may be, but you are wrong to exchange them with facts, since you can list this that and the other thing about your family, but it does not stand as a substitute for such an elementary lacune in reasoning or presentation of facts.

    • I chose to use the handle “notamoron” because I felt that that would differentiate me from the other posters, like you

      You claim you’re not a moron, yet don’t bother to trouble yrself to read the comment rules here that specifically prohibit such ad hominem arguments. Therefore your future comments will be moderated until you can prove you can both read the rules & observe them.

      Is there gonna be any moderation against offensive comments like that

      Thanks for pointing that comment out to me which I hadn’t noticed. It is troubling.

      the reason I haven’t read “The Israel Lobby” is not because I’m afraid it will upset my “tender sensibilities” but because I don’t really agree with Walt on most of his points

      You have no right to attack the arguments in the book if you haven’t read it. It makes you look like an intellectual charlatan. Sometimes it’s actually useful to read the views of someone you disagree with; it opens up the mind to new possibilities (though possibly not your mind).

      Am I obligated to read every book?

      No, just the ones you want to attack.

      I’m sure I can give you a long list Zionist books that you wouldn’t want to read

      I’m quite well read in that subject area. You might find that I’d read most books you’d suggest.

    • Here is a discussion that a Jewish Zionist racist, Arie Brand and I had on the Mondoweiss list.

      Jewish Zionist racist [Bar Kochba]:

      Phil, if you have any regard for the truth left, read George Orwell’s article written in 1939 called “Marrakesh” (it is available on-line). He writes at length about the poverty, degradation and antisemitism directed at the Jews in Morocco (and remember Orwell was ANTI-ZIONIST).

      My Comment 1:

      What sort of sociological observer was Orwell?

      Did he at least understand the local Arabic, Berber, and Judeo-Spanish dialects?

      Did he compare Moroccan Jews with other Moroccans or with Europeans? Did he take into account the attempt of Moroccan Jews to act as native collaborators for the French and the hostility that such behavior might engender? Did he take into account the persistence of depression conditions in French dependencies?

      My Comment 2:

      It is also worthwhile to mention that Moroccan Jews had higher education levels than non-Jews and were the targets of Alliance humanitarian assistance.

      I read Masa ba`rab by Romanelli when I was an undergraduate. It was not obvious that Moroccan Jews lived worse off than Moroccan Muslims in the 18th century, and by the 20th century they were on the whole quite better off.

      The whining about exceptional Jewish suffering is simply not credible and is just another scam like the Refusenik Movement [in which I was conned into taking part.]

      Arie Brand:

      Professor David Pinto is a Dutch Jew of Moroccan origin. His family moved originally from Morocco to Israel but in 1963 he transferred from there to Holland.

      He is presently professor in intercultural communication at the University of Amsterdam, President of the European branch of the World Federation of Moroccan Jews and of the Cooperative Alliance between Moroccan Jews and Moslims. According to the Dutch language journal “Maghreb Magazine” it was nothing to be amazed about that Moroccans have taken the iniative for this alliance because Morocco has “a 2000years old tradition of a peaceful living together of both groups”.

      The prominent Dutch newspaper “De Telegraaf” reported on 20th September 2005, on an interview it had with Pinto at the burial of a prominent Dutch Rabbi:

      “Many Dutch youths of Moroccan origin do, according to Pinto, not realize that Morocco was for a long time a very pleasant country for Jews. The professor said: “In my time there were about 300,000 Jews in Morocco”. Jews can (could) function in all parts of society. There was no discrimination whatsoever.

      This was confirmed by Job Cohen, Mayor of Amsterdam, after a recent visit to Morocco. Cohen also pointed to the fact that one of the most important advisers of the Sultan, Mr.Andre Azoulay, is Jewish.

      I have the most profound respect for Orwell (though not for Bar-Kochba) but one wonders how accurate his information on pre-war Morocco, gathered during a short visit, was. In fact the only information he provides on discrimination against Jews was that certain places had been allocated to them to live. For the rest he reports that they were engaged in all the trades the Arabs had. Their poverty was not different from the overall poverty there on which Orwell commented:

      “When you walk through a town like this—two hundred thousand inhabitants, of whom at least twenty thousand own literally nothing except the rags they stand up in—when you see how the people live, and still more how easily they die, it is always difficult to believe that you are walking among human beings. All colonial empires are in reality founded upon that fact.”

      Orwell was told by (French ?) locals that Jews had a prominent place in local finance and the banks, a fact that he could not rhyme with the poverty he had seen in the Jewish quarter and probaly dismissed as anti-Semitic prejudice.

  8. notamoron says:

    You are really funny. You’re the one that first referred to the Israeli constitution. You said something along the lines of “I wonder what the Israeli constitution says” with the hopes of finding something comparable to Hamas’ unabashedly anti-Semitic charter when I quoted it. I assumed that if they had a constitution that it would be easily found online, because Israel is a democracy. They don’t, they have a declaration of Independence which IS easily found online and contains no racist statements coming near Hamas’ in their founding charter. My reference to my family was a response to Joachim’s claim that Jewish suffering was “nonsense”. Not to you.

    • Irony is wasted on the young & the ignorant. I specifically mentioned the Israeli constitution because I wanted to point out that THERE IS NONE. You beat Hamas over the head for a charter its leaders renounced years ago & yet Israel doesn’t even have the equivalent–a constitution. I find that ironic.

      Israel unfortunately upholds its Declaration of Independence about as faithfully as Hamas upholds its Charter–that is to say, not even close.

    • Mary Rizzo says:

      Don’t be ridiculous…. in fact, I said that it was going to be some kind of child’s play for the likes of you to go on about a Hamas charter you never read in its original language and perhaps have only seen a dodgy translation, when there was NOTHING comparable like an Israeli constitution that others would start to look into. In fact, they were so clever to not create one. They can act as they like and it’s never unconstitutional, they escape criticism and scrutiny.

      If you think that I suggested there was one, read again, because apparently, you jump to aprioristic conclusions and you can’t even engage in a debate responding to the issues raised and only that. It was you who encouraged people to look it up, easy as it was to find and all that. So, your mistake is your mistake and you are caught with your pants down, sorry.

    • Mary Rizzo says:

      not a moron, this is what I wrote:

      At any rate: where is the Israeli constitution so that we can make a comparison? We instead have thousands of quotes from PMs, officials, leaders, Statesmen, who basically declare that Palestinians are fair game for transfer (deportation, to those who remember WW2), extermination, siege, etc. These are apologists for atrocities, and not only do they speak, they ACT. We can see what they do to anyone they feel threatens them.

      I don’t know how it could be any clearer than that. Where is a constitution? Instead we have thousands of quotes and their actions. But they can refuse to recognise Palestinians and do them the most harm possible, just as long as they cleverly do not put it down on a paper people will debate about and accuse them of things for… clever indeed.

  9. Since Salo Baron first criticized the lachrymose version of Jewish history, Jewish and non-Jewish scholars have developed a much better picture of Jewish life in E. Europe and the Russian Empire.

    In Drone Attacks, Buenos Aires JCC, I include the following passage from Michael Stanislawski even though I do not fully agree because he makes some very important points.

    Before we can study the history of the Jews in the Russia of Nicholas I, we must examine the legacy of interpretation bequeathed to us by the classic historians of Russian Jewry. With the luxury of hindsight it is possible to discern that this scholarship reflected the social and political circumstances of its authors as much as history itself. This is, of course, true to some extent of all history writing, but Russian-Jewish historiography was particularly conditioned by contemporary reality: apolitical objectivity was neither its hallmark nor even its pretended goal. On the contrary, all the major historians of Russian Jewry consciously and candidly wrote history as a political and national statement, hoping to redress the tragedies by chronicling their horrors and thereby to influence in the most direct fashion the political fate of the Jews. Many of the resultant works were issued as party publications or parliamentary briefs. Most were published by openly ideological presses or periodicals. While the ideologies involved ranged across a reasonably broad spectrum of political opinion, they were all united against one common enemy, the tsarist regime and its obvious anti-Semitic bent as exemplified by the governments of Alexander III and Nicholas II.

    This exogenous stimulus to scholarship quite naturally had considerable effect on the assumptions, as well as the conclusions, of the scholars. To a large extent, their research was aimed at tracing the origins and background of contemporary attitudes and actions of the Russian authorities in regard to the Jews. This led, perhaps inevitably, to what now appears as an overidentification of the past with the present, a projection backward of the context of the government’s relations with the Jews.

    While anti-Semitism existed in the 19th century, it was simply not an important determinant of the treatment of the Jews. Pogroms, which included violence by non-Jews on non-Jews, Jews on non-Jews, and Jews on Jews arose because the Russian Empire did not deal with modernization particulary well while the main causative factor in the increase in hostility was wisespread disgust and reaction toward Jewish violence, which included sabotage, radicalism, and targeted assassination (including Czar Alexander II). By the 1860s non-Ashkenazi Jews seem to have been at least as annoyed at ethnic Ashkenazim as non-Jews in general.

    BTW, notamoron’s style of discussion is intellectually dishonest. He quoted me selectively and materially changed the meaning of what I wrote.

  10. Typo:

    Pogroms, which included violence by non-Jews on non-Jews, Jews on non-Jews, and Jews on Jews arose because the Russian Empire did not deal with modernization particulary well while the main causative factor in the increase in hostility toward Jews was widespread disgust and reaction toward Jewish violence, which included sabotage, radicalism, and targeted assassination (including Czar Alexander II).

  11. notamoron says:

    Yawn…Joachim, you really have too much time on your hands. Do you want me to help you find another hobby?

    • Dear Notamoron,

      It is just a wee bit disingenuous to quote me selectively, to dismiss as offensive the opinions of eminent scholars in the field of Jewish studies and E. European Jewish history, and then to fling insults in order to avoid addressing the facts, which you refuse to accept out of bigotry and prejudice.

      Take a look at Jewish History: Facts vs. Delusions.

  12. Notamoron says:

    Joachim: Jews have been persecuted throughout history. The fact that you debate that tells me all I need to know. Richard: Mary rizzo first referred to an Israeli constitution, I repeated her mistake and admitted I was wrong. Beating this dead horse is like someone dismissing someone’s argument cuz of a spelling mistake. I guess when you’re defending Hamas and being an Israel-hater one has no other choice.

    • One of the classic lists associated with the lachrymose version of Jewish history appeared on my blog about the same time Notamoron started running on about persecution of Jews. If you are interested, you can read it here. I posted here the standard reply with some minor extensions to take into account the contemporary politics of the Israel-Palestine conflict.

  13. notamoron says:

    [comment deleted for violation of comment rules--off topic]

  14. Notamoron says:

    I’m done with this thread. After seeing all the blind hatred by posters on this site and others all I have to say is thank G-d for giving us Israel and protecting it. We clearly need our own refuge. I love that country. Am Israel chai!

    • All I can say is in my best Yiddish inflection, “t’anks Got.”

      If slogans actually worked, Israel would live forever. But alas slogans without deeds are useless. And Israel won’t live forever unless it changes its path.

  15. I recently posted a blog entry that connects with this thread. It is entitled Ofra Haza: Jewish Arab Tragedy.

Leave a Reply

Spam Protection by WP-SpamFree