Amazon.com Widgets

Thursday, July 6, 2006

This essay starts with a look at Presbyterian divestment:

...Divestment resolutions are of immense propaganda value because they embed in the public mind a connection between Israel and the former apartheid regime of South Africa, against which divestment was pursued with great effect. Fear of being labeled an apartheid regime – with a minority of Jews ruling over a majority Arab population – was a major impetus behind Ariel Sharon’s decision to withdraw from Gaza.

Rabbi Yitzchak Adlerstein was one of two representatives of the Simon Wiesenthal Center in Birmingham lobbying for rescission. He had expected a large Palestinian presence there as well, given the importance of the issue.

The Palestinians, however, were largely absent. They were not needed. In their place were dozens of Jews lobbying in favor of retaining the divestment resolution: Tikkun, Machsom Watch (the organization in which Prime Minister Ehud Olmert’s daughter Dana is active), Jewish Voice for Peace. Norman Finkelstein, who has been dubbed the Jewish David Irving, and whose book The Holocaust Industry was called by a New York Times reviewer a new variation on the Protocols of the Elders of Zion, was there as well, generously offering his latest screed against Israel to every delegate.

Dr. Yehuda Pearl, father of slain Wall Street Journal reporter Daniel Pearl, who identifies himself as a man of the Left, was stunned by the vitriol heaped on Israel by these Jews. His voice quivering with passion, he asked them: If you consider Israel’s behavior too harsh, why don’t you go to Israel and demonstrate at IDF headquarters, where you might have some effect. But the only beneficiaries of retaining the divestment resolution here will be those who killed my son.

Fortunately, the Jewish haters of Israel did not prevail. A new resolution passed, which not only apologized to the Jewish community [Not exactly, but close enough. There is, BTW, a very useful FAQ on the divestment issue in the PC(USA) here (PDF).] for the hurt caused by the earlier resolution and termed the process by which it was adopted deeply flawed, but removed any mention of divestment. (To be sure the new resolution was far from perfect; it called for Israel to dismantle the security fence beyond the 1967 borders, which it called Palestinian land.)

THE LEAD ROLE PLAYED BY JEWS in the attack on Israel was part of a larger pattern...

It then goes on to detail some of that pattern, including a look at Haaretz, and academics like Neve Gordon.

[an error occurred while processing this directive]

[an error occurred while processing this directive]

Search


Archives
[an error occurred while processing this directive] [an error occurred while processing this directive]