Hat tip to Campus Watch
Cinnamon Stillwell and Rima Green have written an article for Campus Watch that I am cross-posting. It concerns that vicious anti-Israel touring circus called Never Again for Anyone, which attempts to draw parellels between the Holocaust and the Israel-Palestinian conflict. Not surprisingly, UC Beserkeley professor Hatem Bazian is a featured player.
http://www.campus-watch.org/article/id/11116
This character is on the perpetual anti-Israel tour and came to to speak at UC-Irvine last year when I tried to pin him down on some of his alleged previous staements about quoting the Hadith of Hate (the one about killing the Jews hiding behind the trees on the Day of Judgement) and telling an audience about all the buildings on university campuses that have the names of Jews on them.
http://garyfouse.blogspot.com/2010/05/hatem-bazian-at-uc-irvine.html
Bazian is orginally from that area he calls Palestine. If you read his words, you come away with the distinct impression, especially in this latest article, that he doesn't much like the United States of America-or at least its policies.
Which, of course, invites the usual xenophobic, jingoistic response: If you don't like it here, why don't you go back where you came from, professor?
8 comments:
The comparison is foolish. Israel may be appropriating land, running fences through private property, cutting down olive orchards, and generally making the lives of Arab-speaking civilians in the occupied territories miserable, but Palestinians are not required to wear green crescents on their clothes, nor are they being assembled in camps and gassed.
Comparisons to apartheid have a limited economic validity, but not a broad political similarity. Palestinians are somewhat better off than Kenyans under British rule, admittedly a low bar, and probably less free than Germans under American military occupation.
Advocates for Palestinian rights, freedom, and statehood would do better to stick to facts, which make a good case, rather than reach for hysterical allegories and analogies.
Siarlys,
I see no real case for "Palestinian" statehood. The "Palestinians" are used by the Muslim world much like Cuba was used by the Soviet Union; an irritant to the dominant power. Much the same can be said for Taiwan. We support the ROC mainly because it causes some measure of grief and concern for Red China. The only difference is that the "Palestinians" are much more effective at causing Israel problems than Cuba did us or ROC does the PRC. Think it is called realpolitik. Don't know for sure. I graduated from a "for profit" university and therefore am probably a dumbass.
Well Cabbie, at least you have a degree, and I do not, but I don't think either of us are dumbasses. I am seldom sympathetic to the rights of nations as nations, but I am sympathetic to self-determination by people. Thus, I support Taiwanese autonomy so long as even half the people living there don't want reunion with China, and in the 1930s, so did Mao Zedong. At present, Red China is our friend and benefactor, which bankrolled George Bush's reckless doubling of the national debt, and his vaunted "tax cuts." So if we only support ROC to be up in the face of Red China, we should have thrown the bone to the dog years ago. Besides, the KMT are now allies of the communist party, because both are Chinese nationalists.
There is a population living in the West Bank territory that might, hypothetically, have been incorporated into Israel immediately after the 1967 war. A rabbi I know who fought in that war said many people were looking forward to it. I can imagine it might have looked like a good deal. But, it does not look workable now.
That population, if not full Israeli citizens, need a stable state that is also not part of Syria, Jordan, Egypt, Saudi Arabia, or Iraq. Ergo, it would be a Palestinian state. This would take away the military jihadists primary irritant, which would be a good thing.
what?
Cabbie,
Whoops! I see that I have inadvertently deleted one of your comments. Please re-submit. It had to be an accident.
No prob Gary
In a bit of a rush but this conversation with Siarlys appeals to me and I will get back to it.
Siarlys,
I am not sure that the KMT and communist party of China are really allies. Hard to say. I for one don't buy the arguement that PRC is a friend of the United States. Kinds of a one sided friendship at best. I believe it is PRC' goal to marginalize us politically and diminish our influence in the entire region west of Hawaii. They do seem intent in building a "blue water" navy to challenge us in the region. May not come down to a real shooting war but their use of soft power with the very real military threat bodes ill for the United States and our allies.
Now I don't believe in the fiction of "Palestinian" statehood frankly. As I noted earlier I believe the "Palestinians" are being used quite adroitly by the Arab world to keep the pressure on Israel and cause severe irritation. Your assertion that the with the creation of a "state" the "military jihadists" would have the source of irritation taken away from them is something I disagree with. The jihadists will not be appeased by tracts of land. They seem intent on the destruction of Israel. They have stated thus and I think they should be taken at their word on this subject at least. Any concessions that Israel makes in regard to ceding territory, aboloshing settlements, etc. etc. is, in my humble opinion, foolhardy.
Post a Comment