J Street Expresses Solidarity with Israelis under Rocket Fire

[shira]

J Street expresses profound worry at the latest developments in Israel and Gaza and expresses solidarity with the Israelis who are being targeted by indiscriminate rocket attacks fired by Hamas and other terrorist groups.

We fully endorse Israel’s right to defend its people from these reprehensible attacks. At the same time, we also feel for the Palestinian civilians in Gaza who are caught in the middle of this tragic conflict.

In Tel Aviv tonight, Jeremy Ben-Ami said:

"We urge Israel to do its utmost to avoid civilian casualties as it responds to this situation. We demand an end to the rocket fire from Gaza and call on Palestinian leaders to do all they can toward that end. We hope that responsible parties, led by the United States, can use their good offices to try to bring an early end to this crisis based on a complete cessation of all attacks on civilians."

http://jstreet.org/blog/post/j-street-expresses-solidarity-with-israelis-under-rocket-fire_1

[font color = "red"]Who knew J-Street was so horribly rightwing?[/font]

[Scootaloo]

1. J-Street is just AIPAC for kids

Watching the two organizations argue is a lot like watching two baptist congregations bicker about whose Pastor gives the better sermon on Timothy 2.

[King_David]

2. Must be their association

With white supremism according to you.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1134&pid=57842

[Scootaloo]

4. Thank you for being my distributor

Maybe someday you'll pull up the spit to try to rebut it.

In the meantime, your attempt does nothing to change the fact that AIPAC vs. J-Street is a good cop / bad cop routine, rather than an actual rivalry of any sort.

Here's how I phrased it to shira a while back

Let's focus on J-Street, this most liberal example of zionism.

Take a look at J-street's webpage. Go head. Take a look at their criteria for a two-state solution. Israel gets to claim every scrap of land it desires to both keep its settlements and "feel secure." What does Palestine get in this proposal? Well, they get equivalent land swaps - determined by Israel, of course. These will be ceded to Palestine gradually, on a timetable. Of course the Palestinians will have to be demilitarized as well, and security will depend solely on Israel... In other words, Israel keeps the land it wants, gets to determine what land it doesn't want, and when - if - to give that to Palestine and maintains military control over Palestine. Gaza's not even in the picture, of course - like most Zionist organizations, J-Street seems to regard gaza as a separate issue from Palestine.

Now wait, wait, J-Street is the cadre of "liberal" Zionists, right? So surely they have a plan, some ideas for if the Palestinians balk at some of this, right? I mean, as liberals, they want to understand that there are two sides to an issue, especially an important one like this, right? What if the Palestinians don't want to do land swaps? What if they want to manage their own security? What if they insist on Gaza being part of the process? What if they insist on keeping east Jerusalem? Well, J-street... doesn't care. In fact, the Palestinians don't actually feature in the J-street two-state plan, except as objects to be acted upon. They are not people, they're fauna, and all that matters in the J-street plan is what Israel wants and what the Quartet can leverage for Israel.

Perhaps understandable as J-Street never advertises itself as anything other than staunchly, perhaps a little crazily pro-Israel. Have a look at their "Myths and Facts" page, most of it is them assuring a visitor of their Zionist cred - yes they hate Richard Goldstone, yes they endorse settlements, no they did not favor admission of Palestine to the UN, yes they want to sanction the fuck out of Iran so hard every Persion's ass bleeds, et cetera. it's like AIPAC for kids.

But still. Their plan for peace between Israel and Palestine doesn't actually feature Palestinians at all. It grants them no importance, does not consider they may have their own desires and plans and agency. They will accept Israel's desires or they get nothing. Gaza's not even anywhere in the picture. J-Streets position, thus, is that Israel's Jews and their needs and desires come first, second, and last, and the Palestinians get the scraps, if that. Israel has the right to dictate what it will allow Palestine ot have, when, and to what degree, and if the Palestinians don't like the dictation, the control, well them... then...

J-Street has no concrete "or else" or "in case of" ideas. It really doesn't need to, we all know what happens if the Palestinians decide they don't like the terms being dictated to them - brutality. It would be too gauche for the hipster AIPAC to come out and say that if its goals are not met, the Palestinian will be brutalized by Israel until greater demands are met... but that's really how it works. That's the "or else", the singular alternative to J-Street's plan - if a total surrender to Israel's wishes cannot be secured, apply more force, because there is no allowance for considering the Palestinian's positions, desires, and needs.

And of course, in typical two-state Zionist fashion, they advocate a two-state solution not out of a belief in Palestinian self-determination, not out of a belief that it's the best chance to start healing an old wound. No, it's all so that the races remain separated, because as always, integration is seen as the real and truest danger to Israel.

...

If Kach is the equivalent of the klan, riding around shooting and terrorizing and openly proclaiming racial supremacy, then J-Street could be compared to the Heritage Foundation - the same notions and beliefs, packaged with a feel-good spin and a family-friendly webpage. That the two groups might have profound disagreements with each other does not erase the foundational principle of racism they both share.

[King_David]

5. Do you know who talked about Zionism

Being Jewish supremism originally ?

[Scootaloo]

8. Originally? Theodore Herzl

But I know who you're getting at Dave. We already covered this. You even decided to support that other David's thesis in your very next post.

Speaking of, still waiting to hear about your position regarding Crimea.

[King_David]

11. Disrespect for Herzl aside

It was David Duke .

[Scootaloo]

13. As I said, already covered

Including your support for his thesis of "Jews = Zionists."

How about that? Not only are you slopping at the same trough as homophobes like Kenneth Meshoe and Chloe Valdary, but with Antisemites like David Duke and, er, Chloe Valdary.

[King_David]

14. No clue what you going on about

But Zionism is the Jewish national project and people who hate Zionism hate it for that reason and that includes Davud Duke his followers and those who call themselves Antizionists but not antisemites .
( which is exactly the same thing)

[Scootaloo]

20. I wonder if you could red that aloud without fainting

Punctuation man, discover it's use!

At any rate. The "Jewish National Project" happened to ethnically cleans 700,000 people from their own country, installed a "borderless" military state that has invaded all of its neighbors at least once, currently wages a brutal occupation against the remnants of the population it purged, and as we speak is using random missile barrages to kill civilians "in self-defense."

Myself, I like to think that this shit is in no way representative of the Jewish people. Which is what differentiates me from the likes of you or David Duke, who see no such line, and wish to associate "Jew" with "carnage". He, because he hates Jews and wants to defame them, you because you love carnage and you can exploit Jews as cover for your hate; anyone who criticizes your hate "hates Jews!"

[shira]

23. The IDF is "using random missile barrages to kill civilians in self-defense".

The other crap in that post is just as bad.

No rational, intelligent discussion can be had since you're so OTT.

[Scootaloo]

25. Finally, we agree on something

I'm not not sure you know what it is you're agreeing to.

[shira]

27. Right. One of us discusses facts, history, and reality. The other one….

…not so much.

Therefore, no rational intelligent discussion can be had.

[Scootaloo]

28. Wow, you're on spot!

But don't worry Shira, I'll keep persisting in my effort to engage you with rational and intelligent discussion.

[King_David]

33. I keep on forgetting that you are a Jewish national spokesman

Apologies

[cali]

41. I just spent some time on the J-Street website. I think you mischaracterize it rather badly

[Mosby]

43. your homophobic slur made it past a jury - 3 to 4

[Jefferson23]

3. AIPAC is more up front, I will give them that..what you see is what you get. n/t

[shira]

7. Well, Zionists are all the same - right? From J-Street to the worst Kahanists….

Not much difference, correct?

It's why all Zionists must be loathed, dehumanized as racists, supremacists, warmongers; unfit for the civilized world. Every last one of them.



What does this remind me of?

[Scootaloo]

9. As individuals? Certainly plenty of variety, just like anyone else

And honestly I'll bet a good number of them are "Zionists" only in that they have some vague support for Israel (Montel Williams' praising of Israel for its medical marijuana research makes him a Zionist, it seems?) so maybe a distinction should be drawn between people who, when prompted, have some platitude about "supporting Israel" (just as, if prompted, they will "Support Belgium" or "support Laos&quot and the dedicated idealogues such as yourself or Avi Lieberman?

[shira]

10. It's ridiculous of you to equate people like Amos Oz with Baruch Goldstein….

It's actually revolting, and it shows you don't know a damned thing about Zionism after several years in this forum.

They're all the same to you.

That's some pretty ugly prejudice.

[King_David]

12. Zionism ?

That's PC

[Scootaloo]

16. Does that make Pan-Arabism a mac?

[King_David]

18. Where does this feeling of superiority come from?

You know that we are all the same?

[Scootaloo]

24. Macs were never tainted by Windows Vista

(*he says, while using Vista...)

[King_David]

32. You a programmer ?

Sorry for delay was at pole dancing class

[Scootaloo]

38. Nope.

The closest i come to programming is opening this page on a library computer, and letting people get weirded out.

Pole dancing, huh? Learn something new about people everyday I guess.

[Scootaloo]

15. Do they support an act of ethnic cleansing?

If so, then fuck them, yes, I don't give a shit how they parse it.

[shira]

17. No, most Zionists do not support ethnic cleansing.

I know what you're getting at & it's a piss-poor argument.

You maintain that unless Zionists are for a full 100% right-of-return (not just the original 30-50K refugees but millions of descendants) then such Zionists are racist pieces of shit. But allow me to turn that around on you. Because if that happens, given what we know - a full right of return will initiate a civil war.

So no parsing it, if you're in favor of full right of return, you support full-out war, possibly genocide that will result.

Same argument, right?

[Scootaloo]

19. Funny, they're the ones that conducted it

Also, this claim cracks me up:

Because if that happens, given what we know - a full right of return will initiate a civil war.

yeah, here in the US, we heard the same thing about Asian immigration, the granting of citizenship to Native americans, armed forces integration, school integration, immigration reform, all of it. always by the same people, these potato-faced corn-bread wonderfucks who get sunburn from a full moon, screeching and squawking about the superior of the white race and threatenign a campaign of terror if the power of the white race isn't enshrined now and forever.

Just like Zionists do with regard to the Jewish people.

Really Shira. It's really transparent when you and the rest of the Zionists out there make this argument. Because you're basically admitting you'd rather see a decade of war, thousands dead... than let an Arab move back into the neighborhood your ancestors kicked his out of. Why would there be war? Why, because we need to preserve racial supremacy, of course!

[shira]

21. 5 million Palestinians enter Israel & you say no war would result.

And you wish to be taken seriously?

[Scootaloo]

22. That's not what I said

This is what I said

It's really transparent when you and the rest of the Zionists out there make this argument. Because you're basically admitting you'd rather see a decade of war, thousands dead... than let an Arab move back into the neighborhood your ancestors kicked his out of. Why would there be war? Why, because we need to preserve racial supremacy, of course!

[shira]

26. You're parsing. You want a full right-of-return, 5 million…..

….whether or not it conforms to International Law (it does not since there's no precedent for 2nd, 3rd, or 4th generations of descendants of refugees).

You're advocating war.

[Scootaloo]

29. No, I said what I said, plainly-stated. Twice, in fact

That these voices of dire tidings of "civil war" are coming from the sort of people who are so deeply invested in racial supremacism, who are so enamored of violence, that they would rather see such a civil war, than share the neighborhood with a "lesser race." Voices of people who would kill, and kill, and kill, wade through blood and bodies for years, in order to avoid sharing the neighborhood with "those people"

Of course, we've hard all these voices before. They tend to not bear fruit, thankfully.

[shira]

30. If you're not for full right of return, you support ethnic cleansing ex post facto.

How am I wrong?

[Scootaloo]

31. Thanks for admitting your support for ethnic cleansing Shira

Now maybe address what I actually said, if you want to continue this conversation?

[shira]

34. I don't support ethnic cleansing

That these voices of dire tidings of "civil war" are coming from the sort of people who are so deeply invested in racial supremacism, who are so enamored of violence, that they would rather see such a civil war,

Zionists do not want to see a civil war & more violence. A violent civil war is to be avoided. Also, Jews aren't a race. If they are, they're not much different from their fellow Arabs.

And those who advocate 5 million Palestinians going into Israel obviously wish to see a civil war.

than share the neighborhood with a "lesser race." Voices of people who would kill, and kill, and kill, wade through blood and bodies for years, in order to avoid sharing the neighborhood with "those people"

Israel already shares the neighborhood (20% non-Jewish population) and has offered citizenship to thousands of Palestinians already. Israel has offered to take in 10's of thousands of refugees (from Lausanne to Annapolis) as well as offering compensation.

[Scootaloo]

39. it's been my experience Shira...

That the people most prone to threats of bloodshed tend to not be people who want to see such bloodshed avoided.

Take for example the EDL or Minutemen, who look at Muslim and Mexican immigration respectively, mutter dire tidings of "civil war" and occasionally engage in wild violence against these people in an attempt to start such a civil war. have you ever read "The Turner Diaries"? If not, don't worry I don't blame you... but that's not written by someone who wanted to avoid the subject. it was an effort to incite a race war.

so when I hear Zionists muttering such dire imprecations, it's just plain obvious to me that they're not "warnings" - they're threats.

[azurnoir]

6. interesting J-Street being promoted by Rightist 'JPost' maybe it's a way of talking down to libruls

funny though didn't say anything about Human Shields, but did stress avoiding civilian casualties on both sides much in the same manner as HRW and AI

[geek tragedy]

35. unlike some people, J-Street also expresses concern for Palestinians

Because the people at J-Street view both Jews and Palestinians as human beings whose lives are equally valuable.

Not a sentiment shared by everyone who supports Israel, unfortunately.

[shira]

36. Israel's harshest critics expressing concern 4 Palestinians don't really support....

....them. Hamas has been and still is using innocent Palestinians as human shields and sacrifices, and there are no anti-Israel so-called supporters of Palestinians who give a shit about it.

It's denied by most.

And then there are the Palestinian victims of the PA and Hamas regarding civil liberties. No anti-Israel self-proclaimed Palestinian supporters can be bothered by gay rights, women's rights, torture, etc. under Hamas and Fatah.

[geek tragedy]

37. oy. nt

[Scootaloo]

40. Don't sweat it

Some people have spent so much time pruning their morality down to a callused, scarred stump of a thing, that they simply can't comprehend empathy. Some have invested so much time and effort into convincing themselves that these other people over there are subhuman, monsters, evildoers whose deaths are to be celebrated, that they can't even make an effort to understand people who do care. it's an alien concept. So they end up assuming people who give a shit are actually up to no good.

I imagine the process of emotional self-castration is a painful one, which is why such people are invariably full of rage, in addition to the hate.

[cali]

42. ooh boy. I suggest some self-reflection on your own words.

and beyond that, I'm not getting into it. I respect many of your posts here but I think you've become swallowed up in, well, let's just say swallowed by your own rhetoric.