Jeffrey Goldberg, latest BDS smear: Presbyterian Church is anti-Semitic, David Duke supports it

[R. Daneel Olivaw]

http://mondoweiss.net/2014/06/goldberg-presbyterian-divestment.html

Never before on Twitter have so many pro-Israel Jews and mainstream Jewish organizations excitedly linked to the website of David Duke.

The American Jewish Committee did it. Rob Jacobs of StandWithUs Northwest did it, twice. Blogger Elder of Ziyon did it. The Executive Director of the Boston Jewish Community Relations Council did it. The Algemeiner did it.

Suddenly pundits and leaders in Jewish-oriented media want to know: “What does former Klansman and white supremacist David Duke think?”

And the impetus for Duke-Mania 2014 (Jewish edition)? Duke recently issued a statement in support of the Presbyterian Church USA’s move for divestment. The insinuation—rarely spelled out—is that if someone as anti-Semitic as Duke agrees with an action, the action itself is anti-Semitic.

Sound like anybody we know?

[Jefferson23]

1. lol, stupid tool that he is for Bibi. n/t

[lostincalifornia]

2. Without address the controversy about the church, because someoagrees with a position of a group

Does not mean that group endorses that person

[shira]

3. The problem with Mondoweiss, like PCUSA, is that it sits in moral judgment of Jews....

Leave it to Jews to sit in moral judgment of themselves. Outsiders, and bigots in particular, don't get to do that.

Full stop.

It's noteworthy that David Duke claims credit for devising Presbyterian Church strategy on Israel.

[Jefferson23]

4. This is one of the most nonsensical statements I have ever seen. n/t

[shira]

5. BDS and its advocates believe the vast majority of Jews are wrong on Israel....

That we cry antisemitism to deflect legitimate criticism of the Israeli gov't. They believe we support war crimes, apartheid, ethnic cleansing, colonialism, nazi actions vs. Palestinians, etc...

IOW, they sit in moral judgment of Jews.

[Jefferson23]

6. Try and not conflate Israeli Jews with all Jews. There are non Jews who support Bibi as well.

Nuance is not that hard.

People, whoever they are, who support the occupation and benefit from it, will be condemned for it.

[shira]

7. The point is BDS offends the vast majority of all Jews, both within Israel and outside....

BDS proponents sit in moral judgment of the vast majority of Jews they accuse of shilling for a rogue state, defending war crimes, deflecting criticism w/ false charges of antisemitism, etc.. How can one not feel contempt for pro-Israel Jews who hold such loathsome views?

[Jefferson23]

8. I already told you, those who support the status quo, will be called out for it.

A large percentage of white American people did not/do not appreciate being called racist, but they were/are,
regardless.

[shira]

9. So since BDS'ers believe the vast majority of Jews are wrong....

....in a very bad way & therefore require being called out on it, is that not sitting in moral judgment of Jews?

One more question please:

Do u believe mainstream Jews are cynically using the antisemitism charge in order to deflect legit criticism of Israel?

[Jefferson23]

10. Israeli policy, that is what they object to. Close to 50 years of occupation.

They're not sitting in moral judgement of Jews, for the sake of them being Jewish, no.

It is obvious to much of the world that Netanyahu's government intends to
ride out the occupation as long as he can...he will not cede any land. He
made that clear with Kerry recently.

[shira]

11. Do u believe mainstream Jews cynically charge legit critics w/ antisemitic smear? n/t

[Jefferson23]

12. Propaganda is an old tool for pushing an agenda..not unique nor exclusive to the I/P conflict.

Critics of Israeli policy come in many shapes and forms..from Israeli Jews and Jews from
all over. Some of Israel's greatest critics are Israeli Jews.

I have no idea how you define/identify/measure mainstream Jews..weird question.

[shira]

13. Specifically the BDS crowd, accusing Israel of apartheid, etc.

When the vast majority of Jews (including leading human rights orgs like the ADL, Simon Wiesenthal Center) call them out for bigotry, they're doing so disingenuously?

[Jefferson23]

14. Apartheid has been described by Kerry and his concerns were pretty well documented even

with his bit of back peddling. The main reason this is occurring in conversation more in the here and
now is because of people who understand it, such as John Dugard. There are reasonable educated people
who do not have it in for Israel. Kerry knows this and I think he was pretty shocked that Israel
would not make the deal, regardless of how generous it was..thus his commentary about apartheid.

ADL and Wiesenthal center have been highly political and not fair, yes. They are 100% behind Bibi,
no matter what. I believe they are well aware of the brutality of the occupation yet continue
their support and lost credibility as a result. Abe Foxman is a very different man today than
when he first began in earnest many years ago.

BDS has not made their distinctions clear for a two state solution and it seems to be a
stretch their efforts would change the most important player, the United States. This
administration wants a deal, if Abbas does not go to the ICC, the US and Israel will
succeed and it will leave the Palestinians without a viable state..most of the WB left
for Israel's state, water resources, and only a very small part of EJ for the Palestinians.

The traction we see now from Europe about their warning/emphasis on illegal settlements
are to get Netanyahu back to negotiating. The divestment by the Presbyterian church
is sincere, they are morally offended by the lack of a peace deal. Again, watching and
listening to Israel's government refuse to stop the settlement expansion and seeing how
everything then blew up is the incentive for the divestment measures.

The resentment toward Israel is primarily the occupation and has been for a long time, but
it is also true, I feel, that anti semitism will grow as a result..you can't control the murky
part of humans to conflate their anger and frustrations.

[shira]

15. Apartheid was PREDICTED by Kerry as a possibility, not what is reality now....

There are no mainstream voices describing Israel as apartheid. It's not that BDS only claims there's apartheid policy in the W.Bank, but also within Israel proper. It's the half-truths and lies inciting hatred towards Jews/Zionists that makes BDS particularly odious. The BDS advocates here argue there's apartheid in the W.Bank, realizing how weak those claims are within the green line, but BDS lies about apartheid within Israel doesn't appear to bother BDS advocates here. Seems anything goes...

When you say that the ADL and SWC are political and that they use antisemitism in a cynical way to deflect criticism of Israel, that's one helluva charge. The vast majority of Jews get to define what is and is not antisemitism. Non-Jews don't get to define it for us. I know of no other minority ethnic group accused of crying wolf as much as the Jews are being accused. The point being that if blacks, arabs, or muslims were being similarly denounced for crying wolf, their accusers would be cast out of the progressive tent as rightwing racists and bigots. With the Jews, it's different. Why?

[Violet_Crumble]

17. I've got a question for you..

The vast majority of Jews get to define what is and is not antisemitism. Non-Jews don't get to define it for us.

So how come you don't have the same rule of thumb when it comes to Islamophobia? It's just that yr not Musllim, yet there you are time and time again defining what isn't Islamophobia. (I've rarely seen you define anything as Islamophobia, but feel free to supply me to lots of links where you've done so and I'll be happy to be corrected).

Wouldn't it be a better idea to have the same stance about all forms of bigotry?

[shira]

18. How am I defining what is and is not Islamophobia? Examples please. n/t

[Violet_Crumble]

19. You just came from a thread where yr arguing exactly that

Remember Landes? It was less than five minutes ago you posted claiming that he's not engaging in Islamphobia. And that's far from the first time you've done that. So explain to me how as a non-Muslim you can tell people what is and isn't Islamophobia while in the same breath tell people they can't tell people what anti-Semitism is and isn't if they're not Jewish?

[shira]

21. Landes is a critic of radical extreme Islamists or what some call political Islam....

...which promotes sharia and is regressive in just about every conceivable way.

There are many credible critics of Islamism out there who are not Islamophobes. I asked you in that thread to provide me with at least one such critic you admire. The fact that you cannot or will not leads me to believe you think ALL critics of extreme or radical political Islam are vile bigots.

So where do we go from here?

[Violet_Crumble]

22. And you've just gone and defined what is and isn't Islamophobia...

Thanks for yet another example, and only a few posts down from where you insisted that non-Jews can't define what is and isn't anti-Semitism. Yet here you are telling people what is and isn't Islamophobia and yr not Muslim.

So why do you have different standards for different groups of people? Are there any more exceptions I need to be aware of?

And as you appear to be unable to read what's posted in response to you, I told you I'm not going down any more of those stupid rabbit holes you create whenever you want to divert the topic away from something you don't want to discuss.

Where we can go from here is you could start trying to read what gets posted in response to you and actually attempt to address it. And yr yet again blatantly ignoring that Landes doesn't focus solely on extremist groups. I read an article from him on Muslims in Europe and immigration and he was referring to all Muslims, not extremists, though I get the impression he believes all Muslims are extremists...

[shira]

24. There's no point discussing Landes when u cannot or will not....

...name one name one critic of radical Islamism who is not a bigot or Islamophobe. When you believe all critics of political Islam are vile bigots and Islamophobes, you're essentially arguing that criticism of radical Islamism = Islamophobia.

Muslims do not define Islamophobia as any criticism of radical Islam.

[Violet_Crumble]

26. And yr still insisting on defining what is and isn't Islamophobia...

Why the different standards when it comes to Islamophobia and anti-Semitism? You can't sit there and insist that anyone who's not Jewish has no right to an opinion on what is and isn't anti-Semitism while you sit there as a non-Muslim insisting that you can have an opinion on what is and isn't Islamophobia. So how about you explain why you have different standards for different groups of people? What makes Islamophobia a different sort of bigotry?

I see yr still not bothering to read a single word that you reply to. Go back. Read what I said about not following you down any stupid rabbit holes, and try to digest it instead of just repeating the same thing over and over as though repeating it makes what I said invisible...

[shira]

30. I let Muslims decide what is or isn't Islamophobia, and unlike yourself.....

....they do not define Islamophobia as any or all criticism of extreme radical Islam.

[Violet_Crumble]

32. But you don't. Yr doing exactly what you insist people who aren't Jews aren't allowed to do...

That's one hell of a double standard, especially as you've rarely said anything at all is Islamophobic. So if yr going to insist that you as a non-Musllim can define what isn't Islamophobia, don't sit there and demand that everyone else doesn't do what you do...

[shira]

35. Huh? I agree that smearing all Muslims is prejudiced and bigoted....

But Landes doesn't do that. So how exactly am I opposed to the definition of Islamophobia?

[Violet_Crumble]

38. You just don't agree that it's happening when it's blatantly there in front of you...

I've lost count of the writers like Landes that you've rushed to defend who've made sweeping claims about Muslims, especially in Europe. But if someone were to use the same words about Jews rather than Muslims, you'd have a very different reaction. So if I was someone unfamiliar with this forum, I'd be wondering to myself why there's such a very polar opposite reaction depending on which group of people's being talked about...

[shira]

49. I've read Landes before and he's always clear about radical Islam....

There's really nowhere else for us to go here. It's quite clear you believe ALL critics of radical Islam are vile bigoted Islamophobes. There are many credible critics of radical Islam out there, plenty on the progressive or liberal Left, and you're incapable of supplying even one name.

[Violet_Crumble]

54. There's a difference between reading and comprehending, Shira...

Someone can read something but not understand what it's saying, in yr case articles that contain European anti- bigotry against those who are adherents of Islam.

Another thing yr failing to comprehend is that repeating the same bullshit incorrect claim about me in the forlorn hope I'll rush down yr rabbit hole with you comes across as really lame. So quit it with the 'it's quite clear you believe' bullshit. You don't have the fucking slightest idea what I believe, and from past experience, even when I tell you what I believe you ignore it and continue to repeat the same nonsense as you did before...

And learn the difference between incapable and unwilling. If you can't manage that, at least try to discuss what yr responding to instead of dragging stuff from one thread to the other because you got cut short in another thread...

[shira]

70. I call BS on what you're claiming to be Islamophobia...

I don't have any reason to believe that you find ANY critics of radical Islam credible.

This isn't about prejudice against all Muslims. We can continue this once it's clear you acknowledge there are legit critics of radical Islam who are not vile, rightwing conservative bigoted Islamophobes, etc.

Until then...

[Violet_Crumble]

23. Can you explain how this article by Landes is criticising 'radical extreme Islamists'?

The disconnect referred to in the article constitutes one of the most worrying developments in Western culture over the last decade: between a elite that controls much of the discussion in the public sphere (journalists, academics, talking heads, mainstream politicians) and who fear being called Islamophobes and racists more than they fear Islamist racists, and a population of people who, whenever they voice concern about the behavior of the Muslim neighbors, are told not to be Islamophobic racists.

and

Thus, Islam’s – Muslims – relationship with the “other” (kufr, infidel, lit. one who covers [the truth]), is the great problem to resolve in this coming generation, and at the heart of that problem lies the ability of Muslims to tolerate criticism from outsiders.

http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/news/richardlandes/100101297/liberal-intellectuals-are-frightened-of-confronting-islams-honour-shame-culture/#dsq-content

If yr still struggling and insisting that you as a non-Muslim can decide what is and isn't Islamophobic, try exchanging the word Jewish for Muslim and see how you react.

[shira]

25. Landes is clear about who and what he is criticizing at the beginning of that article...

A recent series of polls indicate that European public opinion is substantially concerned by the increasingly aggressive Islam that their substantial immigrant populations have taken to expressing. To quote Soeren Kern, Senior Fellow for Transatlantic Relations at the Madrid-based Strategic Studies Group:

The findings – which come as Europeans are waking up to the consequences of decades of mass immigration from Muslim countries – point to a growing disconnect between European voters and their political masters regarding multicultural policies that encourage Muslim immigrants to remain segregated rather than become integrated into their host nations.

The survey results mirror the findings of dozens of other recent polls. Taken together, they provide ample empirical evidence that scepticism about Muslim immigration is not limited to a "right-wing" political fringe, as proponents of multiculturalism often assert. Mainstream voters across the entire political spectrum are now expressing concerns about the role of Islam in Europe.

The disconnect referred to in the article constitutes one of the most worrying developments in Western culture over the last decade: between a elite that controls much of the discussion in the public sphere (journalists, academics, talking heads, mainstream politicians) and who fear being called Islamophobes and racists more than they fear Islamist racists, and a population of people who, whenever they voice concern about the behavior of the Muslim neighbors, are told not to be Islamophobic racists. The problems are knotty and painful to disentangle. Here’s my outline of an approach. (For a longer version of the following essay, see my blog, The Augean Stables.)

It's clear that Landes is not attacking all Muslims.

Like I wrote earlier, you seem to believe that any criticsm of radical or political Islam is Islamophobic. I assure you that doesn't sit well with secular/liberal Muslim victims who are oppressed by radical Islamists.

[Violet_Crumble]

28. Did you even bother to read the bits I quoted? They were about all Muslims in Europe...

How someone can read that crap and sit there and defend it is beyond me. What makes it even more revolting is if things like that was said about Jews you'd be the first person yelling that it's bigotry. Different rules for different groups, I guess...

Like you wrote earlier? You don't have any idea and even less interest in knowing what I believe. Don't make me repeat for the umpteenth time what I've said to you about rabbit-holes. I'm not playing those stupid games when you want to go off on tangents, so you may as well give it a rest...

btw, as you seem really intent on not focusing on what was being discussed in this thread, here's the link so you can refresh yr memory...

http://www.democraticunderground.com/113465064#post17

[shira]

29. Your cherry-picked quotes took Landes' words out of context....

It's clear Landes was referring to extreme radical Islam. He made that clear from the beginning of his article.

It's also clear you consider any and all criticism of extreme Islam as Islamophobic. So you're really the one here who is non-Muslim attempting to define what is and is not Islamophobic.

[Violet_Crumble]

34. Nope, they didn't and they weren't cherry picked.

Newsflash, Shira. When someone talks about those who follow the religion of Islam, they're talking about Muslims, not extreme radicals, though I'm aware that Landis and his ilk think all Muslims are extreme radicals. That was more of the same anti-immigration bigotry that's been defended here in the past.

What's clear is you have no fucking idea what's clear, both with Landis and my own views. Do you think attributing views to me I don't hold is impressing or convincing anyone? And what do you get satisfaction wise out of doing it and ignoring what people's actual views are? And you don't know if I'm Muslim or not, and I'd never tell someone like you if I was anyway. So I'll suggest again that you give it a rest because it's really quite pathetic...

[shira]

37. So when I quoted Landes (in bold print) he was not referring to extreme Islam?

Is that what you're saying?

[Violet_Crumble]

40. Using yr 'logic' yr cherry picking...

For those of us who read the entire article, he used the routine of many bigots, and started by talking about extremists and then bringing Muslims in general into the equation...

[shira]

42. Landes was clear from the start. When you're obsessed with smearing political opponents....

....I guess you'll read into their articles whatever you're content on reading.

Have a great day!

[Violet_Crumble]

46. Yes, he was clear that he's indulging in anti-Muslim bigotry...

It's telling that you see pointing out Islamophobia as 'smearing political opponents', and that yr the one who's sat here doing what very much comes across as smearing when it comes to me and my views.

Why do you keep saying have a great day? It's not like yr not going to reappear only minutes after I post repeating the same thing over and over again...

[Jefferson23]

31. Keep your eyes and ears closed, that formula works for some.

YOU:The vast majority of Jews get to define what is and is not antisemitism. Non-Jews don't get to define it for us. I know of no other minority ethnic group accused of crying wolf as much as the Jews are being accused. The point being that if blacks, arabs, or muslims were being similarly denounced for crying wolf, their accusers would be cast out of the progressive tent as rightwing racists and bigots. With the Jews, it's different. Why?

No actually, no group "gets" to do that, there are legitimate challenges to those claims frequently
across an entire spectrum of ethnicity in the world. They can and have ended up in legal proceedings, such
as your prided NGO Monitor which needed to rescind a false claim they made.

You are confused.

[shira]

33. Really? If the vast majority of blacks, women or gays....

...define what is hateful and considered bigoted against them, there are outsiders (maybe white males) whose opinions are taken more seriously than said women, blacks, or gays?

I call bullshit.

Give me an example.

[Jefferson23]

36. Your entire premise is absurd. NO ONE group, whoever they are, does not get to be judge and jury

without question.

That is what you're trying to do..and it does not hold water.

[shira]

39. No examples? It's just Jews who cry wolf; not women, gays, blacks... Fascinating. n/t

[Jefferson23]

41. Re-read what I stated, if you like. No where in my statements is this about one group. n/t

[shira]

44. It's about the vast majority of Jews being cynical about their charges of antisemitism....

I challenge you try this with any other minority or ethnic group.

Show me where the majority of any other ethnic or minority group cynically cries wolf for the worst reasons.

[Jefferson23]

48. There is no challenge...you are so confused it is astonishing.

If anyone, of any ethnic group, abuses the charges of racism and does not
have the substance to back it up..they can be sued for defamation. They
as an individual and or group can lose credibility.

[shira]

52. So provide an example where this has happened with any other ethnic group....

Which ethnic group out there has lost their credibility by crying wolf?

Name one.

[Jefferson23]

57. For one, ask Reverend Al Sharpton..how he damaged his reputation from making

false claims. Ask the NAACP why they had to do some damage control about Sterling,
his poor behavior and racism was over looked in the past.

What you're attempting to do is ludicrous, which is to give an entire group the ability
to defame others with impunity.

[shira]

61. Sharpton was roundly condemned for the Tawana Brawley incident....

That discredited him. He doesn't repeatedly make one false accusation after another, for years on end, representing mainstream black thought, like you're accusing Jews in general of doing for decades.

As for the NAACP and Sterling, the ADL is criticized by other mainstream Jewish groups for not going after certain people and organizations too. That doesn't discredit the ADL altogether or Jews as a whole who speak out against antisemitism.

If you want to make a clear parallel with what you're accusing the Jews of doing, you'll have to do that with the vast majority of blacks who, like Jews in your view, have no credibility when they accuse others of bigotry.

[Jefferson23]

65. No, Sharpton was not condemned at first, and he brought on others for support who did

so in good faith. When it was discovered the charges were false, he lost credibility.

He does not do that any longer than I am aware of because his past actions cost him.

The rest of your statements make no sense. Each time a charge of racism/bigotry/anti-semitism is
used against a group/person, the group making the charge can be challenged.

Your objective is to garner impunity.

[shira]

68. I'm not talking impunity. This is about Jews in general....

...who you're claiming don't know what antisemitism really is. Or that if they do, the vast majority are using the charge cynically when it comes to Israel.

You won't do that with any other ethnic group.

[Jefferson23]

69. No, you're doing what you know to be a false interpretation of what I stated.

My opinions are all here in this thread for anyone who wishes to read them.

[shira]

71. Fine, I'm challenging you then. The vast majority of Jews find BDS, anti-zionism.....

....to be offensive and bigoted.

Are they misguided and clueless about real antisemitism? Or are they deliberately charging good people of being antisemites disingenuously, in order to stifle debate?

[Jefferson23]

72. For crying out loud, you can re-read the thread again, if you like.

I have no interest to continually repeat myself...you don't have a challenge. You offered
a pretext earlier for impunity...life does not work that way.

[shira]

73. And now you're dodging. Point proven. n/t

[Jefferson23]

74. You had no point, you offered a false pretext for absolving groups from being challenged. n/t

[shira]

75. If you're not charging Jews in general of either being clueless about antisemitsm....

....or using the charge cynically in order to stifle debate, then make yourself clear.

Because that's exactly what it looks like you've been saying throughout this entire thread.

[Jefferson23]

76. Only to the willfully blind. n/t

[shira]

77. OK, here's a related question. PCUSA has tried distancing itself....

....from the IPMN booklet Zionism Unsettled. They voted 54-8 stating that Zionism Unsettled does NOT represent the views of PCUSA. Now obviously, PCUSA was led to believe by Jews that Zionism Unsettled was offensive and hateful. The booklet advocated BDS, antizionist viewpoints. Jews got it right on IPMN's booklet, do you agree? After all, PCUSA voted overwhelmingly to distance themselves from it.

How do you explain that?

[Jefferson23]

81. Anyone can

question the legitimacy of another person or groups claim.

I have not read the booklet, on its face it sounded stupid. The focus should be about
not only ending the occupation but emphasis on the borders..to ensure there is a
viable state for the Palestinians. The booklet appears more of a distraction and
the primary emphasis should be what we can do now to help the Palestinians.

[azurnoir]

85. so you confess that PCUSA has distanced it self from IPMN's booklet but yet are you still

claiming that PCUSA is antisemitic?

BTW here is the REAL link to PCUSA'a statement on that

http://www.pc-biz.org/PC-Biz.WebApp_deploy/%28S%28bykghxckqos5utjrlgvleugg%29%29/IOBView.aspx?m=ro&id=5083

hopefully you find this helpful

[shira]

87. They're still pimping the book at the PCUSA website....

I notice u didn't answer the question in the post u responded to.

[azurnoir]

88. so selling a booklet with a disclaimer that they do not agree with the views expressed is pimping?

well okay then as for why I think the disclaimer statement says it quite well they do not agree with some of the views expressed in the booklet

so now

are you still claiming that PCUSA is antisemitic for divesting from 3 American companies?

[shira]

89. Letter to Heath Rada

http://blog.camera.org/archives/2014/06/pcusas_new_moderator_unsettled_1.html

Letter to Heath Rada

Here is the letter to Heath Rada sent on Feb. 15, 2014 via email under the subject "A Note about Zionism Unsettled, the IPMN and the PC(USA)."


Dr. Heath K. Rada
Address Omitted

My name is Dexter Van Zile.

I write to you on behalf of the Committee for Accuracy in Middle East Reporting in America (CAMERA). CAMERA is a media-monitoring group that promotes fair and accurate coverage of issues related to the Middle East, with a particular emphasis on the Arab-Israeli conflict. Our work can be seen at www.camera.org. I write to you in your capacity as a member of the Presbyterian Mission Agency Board of the Presbyterian Church (USA).

I write to you about Zionism Unsettled, a text prepared by the Israel Palestine Mission Network of the Presbyterian Church (USA). As you are probably aware, this text has been roundly condemned by leaders of the Jewish community in the United States. They assert, correctly, that the text promotes hostility toward Israel and represents an attack on Jews and Judaism.

One of the more eloquent, and incisive condemnations of this document comes from Rev. Dr. Christopher Leighton, a PC(USA) scholar and executive director of Institute for Christian and Jewish Studies. He describes the text as the modern-day equivalent of the “Zionism is Racism” resolution passed by the UN General Assembly in 1975.

Although the United States played a vital role in exposing the anti-Semitic underpinnings of this resolution and for sixteen years worked valiantly and, ultimately, successfully to rescind this smear campaign, the Presbyterian Church is poised to resuscitate this vicious platform.

Rev. Dr. Leighton’s assessment has been confirmed by the people who have welcomed the text. The text has been praised by PressTV, which has been described by the ADL as a promoter of anti-Semitism. It has also been praised by the David Duke’s website, davidduke.com. As you are probably aware, David Duke is a well-known anti-Semite. In the weeks ahead, I will be engaging in a detailed analysis of this text, but it suffices to say that promotes false and vile notions of Jewish supremacy. That is why David Duke was jubilant about Zionism Unsettled. (I hope you forgive me for not providing a link to David Duke’s website.)

The fact that a Presbyterian-produced text has been lauded by people like this should come as a shock. The fact that this document is actually sold on the PC(USA)’s website brings shame and disgrace on the Presbyterian Church (USA) whose historical antecedents have been a bulwark of American civil society. The question I beg you to ask yourself is simply, “What is going on?”

Sadly, close observers are not surprised that the Israel Palestine Mission Network of the Presbyterian Church (USA) has produced such a text like this. This was where the IPMN was headed since its created by a 2004 vote of the General Assembly.

The organization was charged with educating Presbyterians about the Arab-Israeli conflict, has done nothing of the sort. Instead, it has been a regular source of anti-Semitic and anti-Zionist propaganda which it has directed both at members of the PC(USA) and the general public.

In the past decade, the IPMN has falsely accused Jewish groups of engaging in acts of terrorism in the United State. One of its leaders Noushin Framke, even encouraged Hamas to hold onto Israeli soldier Corporal Gilad Shalit as a bargaining chip in its conflict with Israel.

I could go on, but it suffices to say that the IPMN has helped legitimize anti-Semitic discourse in the United States. And despite repeated communications to PC(USA) officials in Louisville, no one seems intent on reining the organization in. Instead, PC(USA) officials have offered a two-fold response.

First they say have said that the organization operates independently of the PC(USA). And then they have asserted that the organization is just trying to start a conversation.

Both responses insult the intelligence. The IPMN does not operate independently. It is dependent on the PC(USA). The denomination collects funds for the IPMN on its website. The denomination’s web store is the one place on the Internet where people can get copies of Zionism Unsettled. The PC(USA) is devoting resources to spreading hate and misinformation.

As far as just trying to start a conversation about Zionism, the PC(USA) has been talking about the Jews and their homeland since 2004. It’s not trying to start a conversation, but to degrade the discourse within the PC(USA) about Israel. And it has been hugely successful on this score.

Officials from both the PC(USA) and IPMN have stated repeatedly that the booklet was not paid for with denomination funds, but was paid for solely out of the coffers of the IPMN. This raises an important question: Who gave the IPMN the money it needed to produce this text?

This is a crucial issue for the PC(USA) to address because as far as anyone can tell, the IPMN is operating under the PC(USA)’s tax-exempt 501c3 status (and the IPMN has not filed any documents (990s) with the IRS). Under these conditions, any funds donated to the IPMN are donations to the PC(USA) itself.

The fact that the PC(USA) does not exert any meaningful oversight over the IPMN – as U.S. tax law requires – does not absolve the denomination for ultimately responsibility for the publication of Zionism Unsettled.

In light of all this, I ask that you use your influence as a member of the Presbyterian Mission Agency Board to do the following.

1. Tell the officials who work in Louisville to stop misleading PC(USA) members and the general public about the connection between the PC(USA) and the IPMN. The IPMN is part of the PC(USA) even if denominational officials have failed to provide the necessary oversight to the organization. If the IPMN is operating outside of the denomination’s 501c3 status, officials need to say so. If they are operating within the PC(USA) 501c3, that needs to be reported as well.

2. Instruct PC(USA) officials to stop selling Zionism Unsettled on the denomination’s store. It qualifies as hate speech.

3. Instruct the PC(USA) officials to apologize for both the publication and distribution of the text and for misleading people about the relationship between the denomination and the IPMN.

4. Initiate a process by which the denomination separates itself from the IPMN as an institution.

By creating the IPMN in 2004 and by assisting it's efforts over the years, the Presbyterian Church (USA) set into motion a regrettable process by which the denomination's "brand" has been damaged. This damage cannot be undone by misleading, vague and, evasive statements about the relationship between the IPMN and the PC(USA).

The damage can only be undone by acts of leadership on the part of denominational officials, which sadly do not seem to be forthcoming. Maybe you can make them happen.

I look forward to your response.

Sincerely,


Dexter Van Zile
Christian Media Analyst
CAMERA

Note: Rada never responded.

[azurnoir]

90. CAMERA is making demands of the Presbyterian Church, interesting

but the letter is dated prior to the conference during which PCUSA voted to distance itself from the booklet

[shira]

92. It's noble advocating for an end to racism, bigotry, and hatred...

CAMERA should be commended for that, and apparently their message was heard as PCUSA voted 54-8 to distance themselves from IPMN's booklet. It's not enough, however, because PCUSA is still selling this hate screed on their website. That's simply unacceptable. I'm certain you wouldn't cut any slack to a pro-Israel organization selling hate literature on its website....

[azurnoir]

93. so PCUSA'a actions are not good enough I see

as for the rest concerning what I would do or say about ProIsrael groups you're very wrong

[Violet_Crumble]

43. I thought this bit was funny...

The point being that if blacks, arabs, or muslims were being similarly denounced for crying wolf, their accusers would be cast out of the progressive tent as rightwing racists and bigots.

Pallywood, anyone?

[Jefferson23]

45. Exactly, thank you. n/t

[Violet_Crumble]

47. It's the closed eyes and ears syndrome at work n/t

[shira]

55. There's nothing funny when Jeff is arguing Jews in general have lost all credibility....

....when it comes to charging others with anti-semitism.

[Violet_Crumble]

56. Pallywood!

And given the way you've deliberately made up stuff about what I supposedly think in this thread, you shouldn't be surprised that yr scoring a rank of zero on the Credibility Meter when it comes to telling me what other DUers supposedly think and believe. I'll take Jefferson's own words and what he tells me he thinks, which is what any sensible and fair person should do...

[shira]

62. What about Pallywood? n/t

[Jefferson23]

58. Not what I said, but you knew that, I believe. n/t

[shira]

64. Yeah, sure. n/t

[Jefferson23]

67. Yes, I am...thank you. n/t

[R. Daneel Olivaw]

116. ...

[Violet_Crumble]

50. There's some women who insist the vast majority of women agree with their hatred of porn...

As far as I know no-one's polled all women to find out what the vast majority think on the subject, but that doesn't stop the self-appointed spokespeople from continuing to insist that their views on feminism is held by the vast majority of women and any woman who dares not agree with them 100% is part of the misogynistic brotherhood, blah blah blah.

[King_David]

16. If course only you guys here in IP

That are anti Israel know what main stream Jews think and know.
Thanks for explaining to all of us on the other side who also coincidently happen to be Jewish ( and yes I do know this . ) but what do we know?
Of course all of you guys know better than us

[shira]

20. They believe fringe groups like Jewish Voice for Peace (JVP) speak for the majority of Jews....

...or that they SHOULD speak for the majority of Jews. Many pretend that is indeed the case.

JVP is as representative of mainstream Jewish thought as flat-earthers who represent most geologists.

[Jefferson23]

27. You have an opinion that aligns with Bibi, I get that...no worries. n/t

[King_David]

51. Inconvenient truth for you

Is that what you said is FALSE
And slanderous
My opinion aligns with almost every single Democratic party congressman .
Your opinion aligns with the few Presbyterian church bigots and their number 1 cheerleader who is an extremist right wing

[Jefferson23]

53. You're funny, the US Congress, aligns with Bibi too.

I have no interest nor concern about what you think about my opinions.

[King_David]

59. I know you more interested in mine

And telling us all what mainstream Jewish opinion is because of course you know better than all of us that are actually a part of the community .

We even have a AntiZionist posting here who "speaks " for all Jews ( which sounds absurd I know ( not you)

The Democratic Party of USA is who I support because of their policies on most issues including Israel .

I could never support policies that David Duke praises supports and was the first to initiate... He hates Jews and now some people have adopted his policies --- some Presbyterian church members .

[Jefferson23]

60. Still trying to speak for Israel, I get that. Your defamation attempts at the Presbyterian church

is offensive, but not surprising.

[King_David]

63. I speak for me

You guys in this forum speak for the Jews , even those posters not a part of the Jewish community speak for the American Jews ( as absurd as that sounds but it's true)

[Jefferson23]

66. You consistently use the words, "us", "we"....not me.

Again, you have no idea who you are speaking to.

[King_David]

78. I use the words we and me because I'm very much a part of the Jewish community

I take my kids to Hebrew school every day , I go to JCC community events , meetings at my shul, board member of my Gay Jewish community org, madrich at Zionist Jewish youth movement etc etc

You ?

[Jefferson23]

79. Does not mean you should presume to speak for all Jews, which you do often enough

about Israeli policy toward the Palestinians.

[King_David]

80. Of course not you guys do ...

[Jefferson23]

82. Again, with the "you" guys. I speak for myself, I do not add, "we". n/t

[King_David]

84. Well you seem to have your pulse on mainstream Jewish community opinion .

You seem to be wired in to mainstream Jewish American opinion far more so than anyone else posting in this forum except for maybe Azenoir or Scootaloo who are also mainstream Jewush community opinion projectors

[Jefferson23]

91. You're the only one who has 'we" and "us" utilized persistently...not me.

In fact, I asked your friend shira, how does she even begin to define mainstream
Jews...she also seems to think she has accomplished this feat...not me.

The projection is all yours..one can see it in your posts.

[King_David]

94. Of cours Shira can't possible define mainstream Jews

Only you guys can .
Shiras an active participant of the community ... What does she know .. Of course the AntiZionist posters the pro BDS posters etc posting in this forum know far far better than us ,who are involved in the community ,what the American Jewish mainstream majority opinion is.

[Jefferson23]

95. No one is claiming that mantle but you and shira..you're all in the know and state very

often to speak for all.

I think that is unfortunate.

[King_David]

96. Actually I don't presume to know better than you guys,

When it comes to mainstream Jewish opinion it's you and Scootaloo an Azernoir who knows best what our Jewish community is thinking.

I'm sure most of the Jewish community at your shuls and jccs and youth groups and day schools and families and dinner tables
and Seder tables are all pro BDS anti Zionist .
I acquiesce to your guys knowledge of this.

[Jefferson23]

97. Again, you do that..not me. Your posts are riddled with "us" and "we".

The rest of your post is nonsense.

[King_David]

99. That's because I am part of 1 of the 2 communities involved in this conflict

Hence my obsession .

You?

[Jefferson23]

100. So you're admitting you do in fact presume to speak for all Jews..ok.

Ethnicity brings no one superiority on this conflict nor any other conflict and does not
entitle anyone to speak for all.

What do you mean by, you? I don't have an obsession.

[King_David]

101. Israel is the Jewish state

That's what brings this obsession to many Jews.
Same reason so many non Jews are obsessed with this country above and beyond any other country such as Korea, Syria,Russia,Zimbabwe,Darfur,Sudan... Etc...none of those countries are Jewish states. ( same reason applies to my interest)

[Jefferson23]

103. Yea, well..like I said, you don't speak for all Jews and your obsession is up to you.

You have a list of which wrongs in the world needs attention before Israel's 47 year occupation,
how nice the way you prioritize for yourself and everyone else.

Your world seems very small.

[King_David]

106. Nope actuall we all the same

We obsess over Israel over any other country precisely because it is a Jewish state and it makes Jews strong.
We all are motivated by this

[Jefferson23]

107. I got it, you feel you can speak for all Jews..I won't forget. n/t

[King_David]

109. Actually I'm talking about us all, Jews and non Jews

And why we obsess over Israel .
And we all have the same reasons .

[Jefferson23]

111. Telepathic too....amazing.

In your mind you have it all figured out.

[King_David]

112. It's not that difficult to "work out"

Actually it pretty obvious.

Or as my kid says : it's obv.

[Jefferson23]

113. As I said, in your mind..that makes perfect sense. Coupled with your world view of which country

should be front and center over Israel..it is interesting to learn how you think.

[King_David]

114. Guess if that makes you feel superior to me

Go for it .

[Jefferson23]

115. No need to...it's telling how you formulate opinions about the problems of the world and

who should and should not receive attention..and who these people should be and somehow,
by some imaginary wisdom, you know who they are too.

I find it fascinating is all I meant.

[King_David]

104. "Ethnicity brings no one superiority on this conflict "

True but it explains a Jewish persons obsession and motivation and passion.

If ones not Jewish with so many troubled countries most being much worse offenders than the Jewish State what motivates the passion for the non Jewish activist to pick Israel to obsess over?
Coin toss ? Pick out of the hat? Dart throw ?
Israel is the Jewish state , that's how we all chose it to obsess over.

[Jefferson23]

105. Wow, I feel sorry for you. I mean that. n/t

[King_David]

108. No need

But thanks .
As a Gay Jew I need no pity , I am protected in the USA and Israel .
Other places in the world such as Gaza would kill me on sight for one or both reasons .

[Jefferson23]

110. That's a change of subject..but you knew that. n/t

[azurnoir]

83. NO those who promote BDS are judging Israel period YOU are conflating that with all Jews everywhere

to smear anyone who agrees with BDS or PCUSA'a divestment from 3 American companies that do business in the Israeli settlements as antisemites

[shira]

86. The vast majority of Jews believe BDS antizionism is offensive, hateful, and bigoted....

Do you agree?

[azurnoir]

98. the vast majority? are you too a spokesman or what?

do I agree with what?

[shira]

102. still playing games? we're done. n/t

[azurnoir]

117. why will you not answer I asked exactly what am I supposed to be agreeing with?

[Israeli]

118. Somebody needs to read this ;).....

zionism is today confronted with its greatest challenge since 1948. It’s not coming from the Arab states or the Palestinians, but rather their problem is the American Jewish community itself.

Once the greatest support group for Israel, that support is dwindling daily as more and more Jews openly support the Movement to Boycott and Divest from Israel.

As the government of Israel continues its reign of terror against the people of Palestine, as more lands are stolen to build and expand the illegal settlements, a growing sector of Jewry is finally waking up to the fact that this is all wrong …. and are doing something about it.

This trend is growing globally at the moment as can be seen in the following report from Mondoweiss …

http://desertpeace.wordpress.com/2014/06/25/american-jews-have-become-the-greatest-threat-to-israel/

Very long read follows but its worth it azurnoir :

Growing Jewish support for boycott and the changing landscape of the BDS debate
by Paul Duffill and Gabriella Skoff

In this article we explore the growing Jewish support for both the BDS movement and other civil society boycott activities which advance the human rights goals of the movement. While not all of the individuals and organizations we mention actively support every aspect of the boycott, divestment and sanctions campaign, they represent a multi-faceted approach to applying international pressure on Israel to abide by international law and human rights treaties.

[shira]

119. BDS is not growing among Jews. Mondoweiss, post-Zios, & JVP do not....

...in any way represent mainstream Jewish thought, no more than flat-earthers represent all geologists or Jews4Jesus represent mainstream Jews.

[Israeli]

121. It is shira ...

and I'm sorry if that article offends you .... but you need to remove your rose tinted glasses or ....pull your head out of the sand .

BTW ...who represents mainstream Jewish thought where you are at ?

Over here there is no such thing ....does Bibi, Bennet ,Lieberman or even Yair Lapid represent me or those like me ? ......No .

Maybe in America you have " mainstream Jewish thought " over here we have Right , Left or Centre .....and a whole lot of confusion over who is who and why .

[R. Daneel Olivaw]

124. Oh, you're going to fall to pieces as BDS grows...

...and you can't label everybody as a racist anti-Semite.

[Israeli]

125. Total denial R. Daneel Olivaw ...

....is what it is . ...

The world is indeed beginning to lose its patience, as the EU envoy said. The status quo in the territories, which already has characteristics of an apartheid regime, is intolerable to the Europeans, who will not stand by indefinitely. After the last attempt to revive the peace talks, the collapse of which was largely due to Israel, friendly nations including Europe and the United States will be forced to take concrete measures against an intransigent Israel. In the 21st century, the world will not accept another 47 years of occupation, dispossession and widespread violation of the rights of an entire people.

The warning by these five states to their citizens should, therefore, become an even stronger warning to Israel’s government: If it does not hasten to take concrete steps toward ending the occupation, all Israelis will pay the price, and it could be high indeed.

Source: http://www.haaretz.com/opinion/1.601819

[shira]

126. Boycotts are gaining steam in Europe, I grant that. Not so much in America….

I don't think it's possible to underestimate the damage Scarlett Johansson did to BDS months ago here in the US. Within days, the NYT was publishing one anti-BDS editorial after another.

But what's the goal of boycotting? To bring the 2 leaders back to negotiations? Unilateral withdrawal? What's your hope?

[R. Daneel Olivaw]

127. It's not the damage that Scarlett Johansson did. It's the damage that

Israel continually does to its image every day.

Also about that unbreakable bond bs that America and Israel share...

Once American politicians smell the winds of change that bond is going to become unglued PDQ.
If there's one thing that Americans politicians understand best is how to desert a sinking ship and save their own backside.

I'd put good money down that there will be a lot of American politicians who were mysteriously for some form of sanctions all along.

[shira]

128. There is no support for a boycott in the Senate or Congress.

Last edited Sun Jun 29, 2014, 01:29 PM - Edit history (1)

It's not happening here.

Europe, granted. But not here.

[R. Daneel Olivaw]

129. Give it time. Politicians can sense the winds of change and move accordingly in that direction

when they feel their jobs are on the line.

There is no such thing as an unbreakable bond.

[King_David]

120. These tiny groups want you to believe that nonsense ,

How a radical anti-Israel Jewish group colluded with the U.S. Presbyterian Church

By Rabbi Eric H. Yoffie
Like virtually all Jewish leaders, I am not too happy at the moment with the Presbyterian Church (U.S.A.) for its profoundly unfortunate and mistaken decision to divest from three companies that it claims “further the Israeli occupation in Palestine.” But I am not any happier with Jewish Voice for Peace, a small Jewish activist group that was only too happy to help the Presbyterians along.

http://www.haaretz.com/mobile/.premium-1.600579


Rabbi Yoffie is a leader of a huge Jewish group

Your article is garbage .

[azurnoir]

122. Thank you interesting read

I think among especially younger this true and unfortunately there is also growing polarization between the Jewish Voices for Peace and aligned groups and the StandwithUs crowd, now in the debate of who dominates the best I can do is answer which is the loudest which has engaged in SLAP suits, which attempts to silence opposing groups by nearly any means at their disposal

[Israeli]

123. you are welcome ....

and thanks to shira for such an intelligent response

[shira]

130. This Mondoweiss article sanitizes David Duke.

Has anyone here read the full article?

It's very long & includes a little interview of David Duke.

There's nothing in it that could be considered critical of Duke. Duke is allowed, without follow-up, to describe himself as a human rights advocate.

Gilad Atzmon recently praised David Duke. This is comparable. In fact, Mondoweiss interviewed Atzmon and in the process failed to mention anything critical of Atzmon. Same here.



What started as a legit article about a logical fallacy turned into a puff piece for David Duke.

It's Mondoweiss.

No surprise there. The comments section, as usual, features its little cheerleaders for Duke. Nice progressive anti-Israel website.

[R. Daneel Olivaw]

131. Shira, I applaud your attempts at smear after smear, but

you just fall all over yourself in the attempt. The article really shows, if you read it that is, that David Duke is not supported by Mondoweiss. He is referenced by people like yourself (see your posts), constantly may I add, to defame BDS, the Presbyterians, the Occupy movement and anything else they wish to discredit.

The article stated that fairly well so I invite any DUers reading this to read the article and not be lead astray by those wishing to further defame those who can no longer abide by Israeli colonialism and apartheid.

[shira]

132. They interviewed Duke & sanitized his views. In no way did Mondoweiss....

....even attempt to call Duke out for anything he's said or written in recent years. They should've cited some recent examples of his bigotry and/or called him out for it in the interview. Note Duke's fanclub in the comments section too.

They did the same with the vile Gilad Atzmon too, and Atzmon just came out in praise of Duke recently.

[R. Daneel Olivaw]

133. Keep on spinning, little top.

Nobody buys your BS and shizzle stirring.