Showing posts with label helen thomas. Show all posts
Showing posts with label helen thomas. Show all posts

Monday, February 27, 2023



James Abourezk, the first Arab American U.S. senator, died last week at 92.

AP wrote an obituary that mentions his positions, and says, "Abourezk also became an outspoken critic of Israel and U.S. foreign policy in the Middle East after touring the region and visiting his parents’ hometown in Lebanon as a senator. The position lost him many political allies, and he decided to retire from the Senate after a single term. Abourezk returned to practicing law in Washington and founded the American-Arab Anti-Discrimination Committee, where he passionately and colorfully denounced Israeli aggressions in the Middle East. "

Perhaps the obituary should be somewhat expanded.

In 2007, Abourezk went on Hezbollah's Al Manar TV for an interview, in English, where he expressed his support for terror groups:

Interviewer: You also called Hizbullah and Hamas "resistance fighters."
James Abourezk: They are.
Interviewer: While the U.S. administration brands them as "terrorist organizations"...
James Abourezk: That was done at the request of Israel. That name was done at the request of Israel – that the United States calls them terrorist organizations.
He also said that the Arab hijackers on 9/11 were cooperating with the "Zionists:"

Interviewer: Here I need to ask you something, which is growing and escalating in the Western world, and particularly in the U.S., which is this immense wave of anti-Arab, anti-Muslim sentiment, lumping all Arabs together as "terrorists." This was clearly manifest in movies and TV series, like "24." Why? Why now? Is it just after 9/11?

James Abourezk: No, it's after the Soviet Union collapsed. The Zionists were looking around for another enemy to have, because to them the Soviet Union was an enemy because they wouldn't allow Jewish emigration. So they used that as an organizing tool, basically, and when the Soviet Union collapsed, there was no more organizing about the Soviet Union. So they looked around, and they said: Well, the Muslims. Let's find the Arabs and the Muslims, and make them the boogeyman. And that's what they did.

Interviewer: But why did this sentiment of hatred increase after 9/11?

James Abourezk: Well, because the Arabs who were involved in 9/11 cooperated with the Zionists, actually. It was a cooperation. They gave them the perfect excuse to denounce all Arabs. It's a racist sort of thing, really racist – you know, picking out these 19 or 20 terrorists – they were terrorists – and saying all the Arabs are like them. So, you know, people in America don't really look at it that deeply, and they accept what the government and the press are saying.
These were not Abourezk's only outrageous comments. When Helen Thomas was fired from AP for her explicit antisemitism, Abourezk came to her defense - doubling down on her desire to ethnically cleanse Jews from the Middle East:

Helen was not necessarily done in by her statement about Israel. What she said is what I’ve been saying for years - the Zionists should get the hell out of Palestine.

Where they go when they leave there is not my concern, just as it is not the Zionists' concern where the Palestinians went when they were driven out of Palestine.
Of course, Thomas said the Jews should get out of Palestine. When she said they should go "back" to Poland and Germany it was clear whom she meant, and when the interviewer asked her to clarify that she wants the Jews to leave Israel she added other places for them to go. 

Abourezk was a terror supporter, a 9/11 truther and an antisemite. An honest obituary would mention that. 

(h/t Irene)




Buy the EoZ book, PROTOCOLS: Exposing Modern Antisemitism  today at Amazon!

Or order from your favorite bookseller, using ISBN 9798985708424. 

Read all about it here!

 

 

Friday, February 24, 2023

The announcement that Jimmy Carter is entering hospice care at his home is prompting a wave of fawning pre-obituaries about what a wonderful humanitarian he is.

No one is talking about his antisemitism.

Carter's animus towards Israel is legendary, but the source of that hate is not his progressivism or humanitarianism, but old fashioned Christian antisemitism.

For decades, Jimmy Carter gave a weekly Sunday sermon at his Georgia church. Some of his lessons promoted classic Christian antisemitism, way beyond what the Christian scripture says.

He says that modern Israeli Jews are persecuting Palestinian Christians in line with alleged Jewish persecution of Christians in the New Testament because of Jewish supremacism:
“…this morning I’m gonna be trying to relate the assigned Bible lesson to us in the Uniformed Series with how that affected Israel and how it affects us through Christ personally… It’s hard for us to even visualize the prejudice against gentiles when Christ came on earth. If a Jew married a gentile, that person was considered to be dead. … How would you characterize from a Jew’s point of view the uncircumcised? Non believer? And what? Unclean, what? They called them DOGS! That’s true. … What was Paul’s feeling toward gentiles in his early life as a Jewish leader? [Paul was not a Jewish leader. Ed.] Anybody? Absolute commitment to persecution! To the imprisonment and even the execution of non-Jews who now professed faith in Jesus Christ. … We know the differences in the Middle East. But the differences there are between Jews on the one hand who comprise the dominating force both militarily and also politically and the Palestinians who are both Muslim and Christians. …
Carter bizarrely claims that sacrifices in the Jewish Temples were a means for rich Jews to avoid taking care of their elderly parents:

“Corban [sacrifices] was a prayer that could be performed by usually a man in an endorsed ceremony by the Pharisees that you could say in effect, ‘God, everything that I own all these sheep all these goats this nice house and the money that I have, I dedicate to you, to God.’ And from then on according to the Pharisees law those riches didn’t belong to that person anymore. They were whose? God’s! So as long as those riches were belonged to the person, that person was supposed to share them with needy parents right? But once it was God’s it wasn’t theirs and they didn’t have anything to share with their parents. So with impunity, and approved by the Pharisaic law, they could avoid taking care of their needy parents by a trick that had been evolved by the incorrect and improper interpretation of the law primarily designed by religious leaders to benefit whom? The rich folks! The powerful people! Because the poor man wouldn’t have all of this stuff to give to God. He would probably, in fact he might very well have his parents in the house with him or still be living with his own parents.”
This is a completely fictional reading of Jewish law.

Carter repeatedly said that Jewish leaders wanted to kill Jesus for various reasons, spreading the very source of Christian antisemitism as truth:
 The subject of his first class was the tale of Jesus driving the moneylenders from the temple. The press soon reported that the president had informed his students that this story was “a turning point” in Christ’s life. “He had directly challenged in a fatal way the existing church, and there was no possible way for the Jewish leaders to avoid the challenge. So they decided to kill Jesus.” 
So the Jews wanted to kill Jesus because he opposed the moneylenders! And in another lesson, Carter doubled down on Jewish hate of Christians:
He soon spoke at a Sunday-school class again; and, with an AP reporter in attendance, told those assembled that Jesus, in proclaiming himself the Messiah, was aware that he was risking death “as quickly as [it] could be arranged by the Jewish leaders, who were very powerful.”
There is a theme of rich, powerful Jews who want to oppress the gentiles - that informed Carter's view of the modern Middle East.

And his opinion of American Jews reflected that same animosity he has towards the Jews of Jesus' time. he blamed Jews for his loss in the 1980 election, more than once.

Kenneth Stein, who worked with him and interviewed him for his own book, quotes Carter as railing against the "Jewish money" that opposed him:
"[Vice president] Fritz Mondale was much more deeply immersed in the Jewish organization leadership than I was. That was an alien world to me. They [American Jews] didn't support me during the presidential campaign [that] had been predicated greatly upon Jewish money."

Carter's aide Stuart Eizenstat also says that Carter blames Jews for his 1980 loss: “From the New York primary [in March 1980] onward, I believe Carter was left with the view that New York Jews had not only defeated him in the primary but were also a factor in his loss in November.” However, while New York Jews did vote overwhelmingly for Ted Kennedy in the primary, more voted for Carter than Reagan in the presidential election. 

Reagan took over 90% of the electoral college in 1980. It was a landslide. For Carter to blame New York Jews for his huge loss is nothing less than pure antisemitism. 

Carter's antisemitism doesn't end there. He noted how Palestinian Christians were fleeing, but he blamed not the Muslim supremacists who are persecuting them, but Israel, continuing his theme of powerful Jews persecuting Palestinian Christians - even though Israel's Christian community has stayed steady.

His hate of Jews naturally spread to his supporting antisemites. When Helen Thomas lost her job for calling for the ethnic cleansing of Jews in Israel, saying Jews must "get the hell out of Palestine" and "go home" to Germany or Poland where they were massacred, one of the very few people who supported her was....Jimmy Carter. She told Playboy that he was very sympathetic but didn't want to go into details because it would get him into trouble. 

Carter also condoned terror attacks against Jews in Israel. Really.

In his "Peace, Not Apartheid" book, Carter wrote, "It is imperative that the general Arab community and all significant Palestinian groups make it clear that they will end the suicide bombings and other acts of terrorism when international laws and the ultimate goals of the Roadmap for Peace are accepted by Israel."

This "humanitarian" didn't call for suicide bombings against Jews to end unconditionally. He advised Palestinians to use them as a bargaining chip to force Israel to give in to their demands. That is literally the definition of terrorism, and Carter is saying that he supports the goals of Palestinian terror.

Carter made many hateful statements about Israel which clearly cross the line into antisemitism. For example, he once downplayed the Iranian nuclear threat because they would only have a couple of bombs while Israel has hundreds, as if dropping a nuclear bomb on Tel Aviv is no big deal. Carter's support and even compliments for Hamas, for Palestinian "democracy" and other outrageous anti-Israel statements could fill a book. But even without mentioning Israel, his antisemitism is clear and unambiguous.

The single most damning example of Carter's antisemitism comes from an incident in 1987.

Neal Sher was the head of  the Office of Special Investigations, the Justice Department’s Nazi prosecution unit. They had iron-clad evidence that a Chicago resident, Martin Bartesch, a member of the SS Death’s Head Division at the Mauthausen concentration camp, was a war criminal and a murderer.

Bartesch's family started a huge campaign against the OSI, writing letters to members of Congress and other prominent people asking for help. Most politicians contacted the OSI to find out the details, OSI provided them with evidence of his guilt, and they would drop the matter.

But, Sher says, not Jimmy Carter.
In September 1987, after all of the gruesome details of the case had been made public and widely reported in the media, I received a letter sent by Bartesch’s daughter to the former president. Citing groups that had been exposed for their anti-Semitism, it was an all-out assault against OSI as unfair, “un-American” and interested only in “vengeance” against innocent family members.

...Not even the staunchest and most sincere devotee to humanitarian causes could legitimately claim that an SS murderer who deceived authorities to obtain a visa and citizenship was somehow deserving of exceptional treatment.

That’s why I was so taken aback by the personal, handwritten note Jimmy Carter sent to me seeking “special consideration” for this Nazi SS murderer. There on the upper-right corner of Bartesch’s daughter’s letter was a note to me in the former president’s handwriting, and with his signature, urging that “in cases such as this, special consideration can be given to the families for humanitarian reasons.”

Unlike members of Congress who inquired about the facts, Carter blindly accepted at face value the daughter’s self-serving (and disingenuous) assertions.
Here is Carter's note supporting the case of a known Nazi war criminal.


Carter took the side of a family of a Nazi against his own government. And he couched it in "humanitarian" terms.

Maybe, maybe one could excuse one or two of these examples in isolation. But in the aggregate, there is no denying it: Jimmy Carter is an antisemite, and anyone who doesn't think that this detracts from his humanitarian work is condoning world's oldest hate.





Buy the EoZ book, PROTOCOLS: Exposing Modern Antisemitism  today at Amazon!

Or order from your favorite bookseller, using ISBN 9798985708424. 

Read all about it here!

 

 

Thursday, February 17, 2011

From Commentary's Alana Goodman:
During an interview with Joy Behar last night, Helen Thomas made it clear that she was standing behind her statements that Israeli Jews should “go back” to Germany and Poland. However, she did make a couple of additions to the list of countries that Jews should “return” to, such as Russia and the United States.

“They’ve been free ever since,” said Thomas, referring to the Jews after the Holocaust. “They didn’t have to go anywhere really, because they weren’t being persecuted anymore, but they were taking other people’s land.”

A visibly uncomfortable Behar then asked Thomas whether she considered herself anti-Semitic – and got something less than a clear answer. “Hell no. I’m a Semite. Of Arab background,” said Thomas. “[The Jews are] not Semites. Most of them are from Europe.”

The former White House reporter then launched into a tirade against the Israel lobby. “We have organized lobbyists in favor of Israel,” she said. “You can’t open your mouth. I can call the president of the United States anything in the book, but if you say one thing about Israel … you’re off-limits.”

Asked whether she had any regrets about making her controversial statement last spring, Thomas said her only regret was that “everybody misinterpreted it.”

“You have the Ari Fleischers and the Abe Foxmans distorting everything,” said Thomas. “So I certainly knew that and I should have kept my mouth shut probably.”

After insisting that her statements weren’t insensitive, the journalism veteran launched into a rambling diatribe about Palestinians being “pushed from their homes” in the middle of the night.

Watch the full clip here if you wish. Though you could probably hear a more rational and pleasant perspective on Middle East policy from a ranting homeless person at a bus station.

From Jeffrey Goldberg in The Atlantic:

Nir Rosen, the journalist who infamously mocked Lara Logan (and who was completely dismantled by Anderson Cooper last night), has been saying hugely outrageous things for years, as I've documented here. He is sympathetic to the Taliban; he thinks al Qaeda poses no threat to America; he wishes Americans would "get over" 9/11; and he thinks Israel is an "abomination" that should be destroyed. After I posted about his previous statements, I was flooded with e-mails from Goldblog readers who told me I missed the nuttiest thing Rosen ever said. It came in an article about his Israeli origins, in which he called his homeland a place of "bloody nationalism, paranoid identity and violent religion." In reading this treatise on Israel and its sins, it becomes clear that Rosen (who attended an Orthodox Jewish day school in New York) feels the sort of hate for Israel and Judaism that one associates with the hardest core of Hamas. 

The truly revealing part of this treatise comes at the end, when Rosen discusses ways to convince Israel to behave in a way he thinks is just: "I find myself in the unique and painful position of calling for international sanctions against Israel and wondering if a punitive bombing of Tel Aviv, the city I love, until it complies with international law, might be a good (albeit quixotic) idea."

Yes, Rosen is calling for the physical destruction of the world's largest Jewish city. I wrote yesterday that I would try to avoid armchair psychoanalysis in this matter, but sometimes these things are fairly obvious. Rosen, an American of Israeli origin, has spent his career rationalizing the actions of Israel's, and America's, most bitter enemies, and he envisions a day when the world community will conduct a bombing campaign of Tel Aviv. Nir Rosen seems to be engaged in a ferocious attempt to shed his identity to the point where he aligns himself with Hezbollah, Hamas, and the Taliban, and argues for the literal destruction of the city from which he came. It is deeply pathetic.  
No comment necessary - these haters speak for themselves.

Although the Helen Thomas defenders in the CNN site run the usual gamut.
JOY: You owed Helen some respect. And you didn't show it. And now I have no more respect for YOU. For someone who claims to be Catholic, you sure are a Zionist and your antagonistic Jew-loving one-sided brutality towards this journalism hero who speaks nothing but the damn truth, just shows you're either really a JEW or you're bought and paid for by your JEW MEDIA CORPORATE EVIL
That's me- Jew Media Corporate Evil!

(h/t DM)

Monday, January 17, 2011

As I mentioned last week, the Society of Professional Journalists officially decided to retire their Helen Thomas Award.

From SPJ:
INDIANAPOLIS – The board of directors of the Society of Professional Journalists voted Friday to retire the Helen Thomas Lifetime Achievement Award.

The vote means the Society will not give out an award for lifetime achievement. The action does not rename the award or remove Thomas’ name.

Both the board of directors and the executive committee heard from many people inside and outside of SPJ’s membership and journalism. SPJ fully understands the concerns expressed by both sides regarding whether renaming or retiring the award is necessary or improper.

A prominent objection to taking any action was that of Helen Thomas’ free speech rights. SPJ staunchly believes Helen Thomas and all people in the United States have a right to free speech. The Society defends that fundamental legal right as a core organizational mission, even when the speech is unpopular, vile or considered offensive.

However, the controversy surrounding this award has overshadowed the reason it exists. To continue offering the award would reignite the controversy each year and take away from its purpose: honoring a lifetime of work in journalism. No individual worthy of such honor should have to face this controversy. No honoree should have to decide if the possible backlash is worth being recognized for his or her contribution to journalism.

“As I said last week after the executive committee meeting, it’s time we in SPJ stop focusing on this divisive topic and start focusing on what unites us,” SPJ President Hagit Limor said. “There’s tremendously important work for us, like training our members for our ever-changing industry and fighting to ensure journalists and citizens have access to public records.”
A very proper decision.

Thomas' Arab defenders like Ray Hanania should note that the SPJ understood what Thomas really said, even as they continue to deny it:

The Jan. 8 executive committee meeting marked the second time in nearly six months the committee considered removing Thomas’ name, stemming from an incident earlier in 2010 when the longtime White House reporter and columnist commented to a rabbi on video that Jews in Palestine should “go home.” Thomas drew widespread criticism after the video was posted online, and she later resigned her job as a Hearst Newspapers columnist. The executive committee considered removing Thomas’ name during a July meeting but did not, noting it was a one-time, spontaneous remark for which she apologized.

In December, Thomas reiterated her previous comments before a speech in Dearborn, Mich., the Detroit Free Press and Detroit News reported. The News quoted her at the time as saying, “Congress, the White House and Hollywood, Wall Street are owned by the Zionists. No question.”
The SPJ knows very well what Thomas meant when she said "Zionists." Apologists for her are the ones who look like fools.

Tuesday, January 11, 2011

From the Society of Professional Journalists:
The Executive Committee of the Society of Professional Journalists voted Saturday to recommend that the organization retire the Helen Thomas Award for Lifetime Achievement. The recommendation, which will be sent to the full board of directors within the next 10 days for a vote, states that the award will be retired with Thomas’ name attached.

The recommendation by the executive committee is to retire the Helen Thomas Award for Lifetime Achievement, meaning no lifetime achievement award will be given. The recommendation is not to rename it or to remove Thomas’ name.

The retirement will not take effect unless the board votes to accept the recommendation.

“This is a complex issue, and the executive committee considered comments and letters from both sides. Because of the importance of this decision, it is appropriate to put this before the full board,” SPJ President Hagit Limor said.

The executive committee said the following in making its recommendation: “While we support Helen Thomas’ right to speak her opinion, we condemn her statements in December as offensive and inappropriate.”
They published this absurd argument against rescinding the award from a self-proclaimed Jew and Zionist, Lloyd Weston, condemning Wayne State University from pulling their Helen Thomas Spirit of Diversity Award:
The reasoning behind WSU’s decision to no longer offer the Helen Thomas Spirit of Diversity in the Media award sends a mixed message to its students – especially journalism students – that the values instilled in them over four years of education are both flexible and expendable; that freedom of speech and of the press is not a foundation, set in stone, upon which life in America is based, but rather merely a suggestion to be taken if it suits you, or left behind when it becomes inconvenient or embarrassing.

I have urged officials of WSU to reconsider what they have done, and to apologize to Helen Thomas, of course, but, more importantly, to the Wayne State University students and alumni who expected better of them.
Weston of course does not explain how getting rid of an award whose very name has turned into an embarrassment is a threat to freedom of speech. Freedom of speech is important, but it does not run roughshod over other freedoms - such as the freedom of Wayne State University and the SPJ from not wanting their names associated with a bigot.

(h/t Backspin)

Friday, December 17, 2010

I have mentioned a couple of times that I could not find a single prominent Arab American who did not defend Helen Thomas' anti-semitic comments, by either denying they were anti-semitic and/or confirming that they were true. I also showed that major Arab American organizations specifically went out of their way to honor her because of, not in spite of, her anti-Jewish outburst.

A single exception has just appeared.

Hussein Ibish, a quite prominent Arab American, has written a pretty good essay on the topic. He spends much of it going rebutting Thomas' and her acolytes' false definition of "anti-semitism" and gives a history of the term as well as of both Christian and Arab anti-semitism. He then goes into the Thomas affair as well:

I really had intended to stay out of this altogether, and I'm not going to ultimately pass any definitive judgment on her recently expressed sentiments, but some observations seem necessary. Her initial comment was very disturbing, but could certainly have been dismissed as an off-the-cuff remark to a hectoring videographer by an exasperated and elderly journalist who was trying to be deliberately obnoxious to someone it seems may have been pestering her. The explanation offered at the time that she was referring to the occupation was never very convincing because she referred to Jews getting out of Palestine and going home to Germany, Poland or the United States, but not to Israel. But had it been isolated and off-the-cuff, as it first appeared, it really shouldn't have been that big a deal, especially since she apologized right away.
Unfortunately, Ibish refrains from mentioning that the full video shows that Thomas seemed to be happy to answer the initial question from Rabbi Nesenoff about journalism as a career and she did not seem irritated at all, and even laughed heartily as she went onto her anti-semitic rant.

Ms. Thomas decided to make some additional remarks that got her into even deeper trouble. Parsing whether or not any of it descends to the level of anti-Semitism seems utterly beside the point. But to suggest, as she did in her subsequent remarks, that "Congress, the White House and Hollywood, Wall Street are owned by Zionists" is just silly, and it's indefensible. Let's take them one by one.
Later he writes
I do think it's possible to read Thomas' most recent comments as a rallying cry to Arab-Americans to get more involved, and that's certainly good advice. But the phraseology is extremely unfortunate and, indeed, inaccurate. And certainly she didn't do anything to contradict the impression that was created in many minds by her original off-the-cuff ill-advised remarks, and more than reversed whatever corrective had been accomplished by her well-advised apology. The debate over whether her original or follow-up comments are anti-Semitic, anti-Zionist or simply inaccurate isn't particularly interesting. But it needs to be clearly stated that the idea that because Thomas is of a Semitic Arab heritage she therefore cannot be anti-Semitic herself by definition holds no water at all. Sadly, there is far too much genuine anti-Semitism among Arabs and Arab-Americans, just as there is a disturbing plethora of anti-Arab and Islamophobic sentiment among Israelis and Jews around the world, including the United States.
Ibish falls short of the clear-cut condemnation of Thomas that is sorely needed in the Arab American community. But at least he recognizes that she was wrong, something that makes him utterly unique - and which highlights that the vast majority of Arab American leaders really either do support Thomas' remarks wholeheartedly or are too cowed by institutional anti-semtism in their community to say anything against them.

Ibish's attempts to draw a parallel between Jew-hatred among Arabs and "Islamophobia" among Jews are unsatisfying as well, simply because the former is apparently endemic while the latter is anything but, especially in the United States. It is possible to find (way too) many Jews whose positions on the Arab/Israeli conflict are in perfect consonance with the official positions in the Arab world, but it is nearly impossible to find any Arabs whose public positions align with Israel's.

So while his essay is flawed, it at least is a belated acknowledgment of the issue, it is thoughtful, and it is welcome as a worthy  addition to the debate.

(h/t Alex)

Tuesday, December 14, 2010

Yet another article by the "moderate" Ray Hanania  shows that his grip on reality is getting more tenuous by the day.

Yes, he still denies that Helen Thomas was demanding, in an unguarded moment, that Jews should  "get the hell out of Palestine." And he insists that her comments about "Zionists" owning Congress, the White House, Hollywood and Wall Street" - classic anti-semitic tropes - were about Zionists. (No doubt, hook-nosed "Zionists" at that.)

But now Hanania is going off on his own bizarre theory - that Zionism is an organization!
Thomas has criticized and denounced Zionism, a political movement with headquarters in new York City. The purpose of the organization is to champion the interests of a foreign country, Israel.

...Zionism is a political organization with headquarters in New York. Its agenda is to defend a foreign nation.

...Ms. Thomas criticized Zionism, a recognized political organizati­on that champions the interests of a foreign country.
That's three times he claims that there is an organization, based out of Jew (sorry, New) York City, that is called "Zionism."

Is he referring to the Zionist Organization of America? Or the ADL? Or, more likely, has he just lost his mind?

Even funnier is how he tries to imply that supporting a foreign country is somehow inherently anti-American. Yet on one of his many websites, he headlines it "Can we save Palestine"? Isn't he then advocating for a foreign entity whose policies might be against American interests? Not only that, on that page he announces his candidacy to run for the Palestinian National Council and for the PA Parliament - indicating that Ray Hanania is more loyal to "Palestine" than to his own country of birth! Why, Ray, is being a Zionist somehow inherently anti-American but wanting to join a foreign government is not?

Just more hypocrisy from good ol' Ray. Keep it coming; it is really funny to see you fall apart like this, over a bitter old bigot no less. Since you claim to be a comedian, surely you can see the humor in this.

The real problem is that, by any objective measure, Hanania really is much more moderate than 99% of Palestinian Arabs. And even he cannot find a way to condemn the explicit bigotry of a fellow Arab. Which does not bode well for the chances of peace.

Sunday, December 12, 2010

The Arab American Anti-Discrimination Committee continues to honor Helen Thomas - not in spite of, but because of her anti-Jewish comments that she made in June as well as more recently when she spouted off anti-semitic stereotypes but tried to cover herself by using the word "Zionist."

According to Ray Hanania's Twitter feed, referring to Friday night,
Phenomenal turnout of 1,000 people at ADC Michigan banquet tonight with the great Clovis Maksoud and standing ovation salute to Helen Thomas
The Arab American News fully supports Thomas' statements, quoting lots of students and activists who support what she said. It also published a ludicrous article by the head of the ADC, claiming that Helen Thomas cannot be anti-semitic because she is a Semite:
Underlying the political struggle between proponents and opponents of Zionism in America is a definitional context. Thomas, a Semite in her own right, delivered politically charged remarks against a political entity, Zionism. Thus, one must ask, is a Semite who makes non-ethnic or non-racial remarks against a political entity anti-Semitic? The answer is clearly no. However, the denotation of "Semitic" advanced by the Anti-Defamation League (ADL) not only extracts Arabs, such as Thomas, from their unilateral definition, but also narrows it to only include Jews. This may be politically expedient for organizations in America, such as the Anti-Defamation League, but is ultimately an incorrect usage of the term.
I guess that Dictionary.com is part of the ADL/Jooish conspiracy.

What makes all this defense of Thomas really funny is that, deep down, Arab Americans know very well what she meant. Amer Zahr, who appears to be an Arab comedian, says it outright in the Arab Detroit paper:
Helen, don’t you know that you can’t say the Jews should get the hell out of Palestine? Don’t you know it’s not even called Palestine? Don’t you know that there never was a Palestine?

C’mon, Helen…

People got upset and Wayne State, your alma mater, discontinued an award in your name. They said you were anti-Semitic. For saying Jews own all the important stuff? As Arabs, we don’t get the anger. If someone said we owned those things, we’d take the credit. Or at least we’d say, “Well we don’t own it yet, but we’re working on it.”
There's yet another irony at play here, as these Arab Americans are fighting for the right of Helen Thomas to spout Jew-hatred in the name of free speech. Beyond the obvious irony that they didn't feel the same way about the Mohammed cartoons, of course.

The fundraiser last night by the Michigan ADC chapter was announced this way on their website:
Join the ADCMichigan Annual Benefit Gala this Friday, December 10, 2010 at 6:00PM at the Hyatt Regency hotel in Dearborn as it recalls the signing of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights on Dec. 10, 1948.
The irony is that the Organization of the Islamic Conference - meaning, most Arab states - does not accept the UDHR, instead supporting the Cairo Declaration of Human Rights in Islam which does not guarantee freedom of religion nor gender equality, and ultimately says that Islamic law defines human rights, not humans.

Has the ADC, so concerned with Helen Thomas' rights to freedom of expression, ever publicly called for Arab nations to adopt the UDHR that they dedicated their fundraiser to?

The hypocrisy shown by this organization is staggering, and the Helen Thomas episode just proves that they care far more about defending bigotry than with standing up for the truth.

Wednesday, December 08, 2010

From The Detroit Free Press:
Arab-American leaders met today with Wayne State University officials, asking them to reverse its decision last week to pull a journalism award named after journalist Helen Thomas after she made controversial remarks. And they defended Helen Thomas against those who say she made anti-Semitic comments Thursday in Dearborn.

"Helen Thomas is not now and never has been anti-Semitic," Imad Hamad, regional director of the American-Arab Anti-Discrimination Committee, said tonight. "She has worked her entire career, 60 years, to bring truth to the American public and she is simply continuing to do that."
Which means that the official position of the American-Arab Anti-Discrimination Committee - who say with certainty that Helen Thomas only speaks the truth - is that Israeli Jews must leave the country that they were born in and that "Congress, the White House, and Hollywood, Wall Street, are owned by 'the Zionists.'"

Not once as far as I can tell has an Arab American leader or spokesperson made the slightest noise that Thomas' comments were offensive.

And this reaction is telling:
The Arab-American group said in a statement that unless the situation "is properly addressed and corrected, this hastily-made decision will negatively impact relations between the university and the Arab American community for many years."
In other words, the group is threatening Wayne State University for exercising its right for free expression - to distance itself from a person now widely recognized as a bigot and an anti-semite, not just by Jews.

Arabs threatening people who do something they disagree with? Who would have thought it?

Monday, December 06, 2010

From James Taranto in the Online Journal Best of the Web Today:
If your lifelong ambition is to win the Helen Thomas Spirit of Diversity Award from Detroit's Wayne State University, you might as well end it all now. Thomas's alma mater terminated the award Friday "after she made controversial remarks in Dearborn on Thursday," reports the Detroit Free Press.

Things move more slowly at the Society of Professional Journalists, whose website still advertises the Helen Thomas Award for Lifetime Achievement and describes Thomas as "a living icon of journalism for her dogged pursuit of the truth in a career that has spanned almost 60 years." Thomas said on Thursday: "Congress, the White House, and Hollywood, Wall Street, are owned by the Zionists." Apparently the truth outran her.

We asked SPJ if it plans to continue offering the award in light of Thomas's latest comments. The society's president, Hagit Limor, quickly got back to us by email. She wrote: "I am placing this item on the agenda for consideration at the next executive board meeting," which will be held Jan. 8.

Having finally managed to reach an SPJ executive--Limor's predecessor, Kevin Smith, stonewalled us six months ago--we asked Limor why the society decided to continue the award after Thomas's last eruption, in which she demanded that Israeli Jews go "home"--that is, that they leave their homes and emigrate to the countries whence their ancestors came. Limor replied: "We discussed the issue at our exec board meeting in July 2010. The majority believed this to be a one-time slip that didn't change Ms. Thomas's lifetime of service, which is what we were honoring."

It must be said that Thomas's comment about "Zionists" was taken out of context and made to look, in most news accounts, like a bigoted rant. It was that, but it was also something even more pernicious.
Read the whole thing.Taranto must be one of those "haters" that we've been talking about.
From UPI:
Journalist Helen Thomas ripped Wayne State University in Michigan for ending a diversity award in her name, saying the school mocked the First Amendment.

The university ended the Helen Thomas Spirit of Diversity Award last week after she made controversial remarks in Dearborn, Mich., about what she saw as Zionist control of American institutions. When announcing the end of the annual award, Wayne State said it pulled the prize and "strongly condemns the anti-Semitic remarks made by Helen Thomas."

Thomas told the Detroit Free Press in an article published Monday the leaders of Wayne State University "have made a mockery of the First Amendment and disgraced their understanding of its inherent freedom of speech and the press."

Thomas, 90, the daughter of Lebanese immigrants, added, "The university also has betrayed academic freedom -- a sad day for its students."

Some Arab-American leaders joined in criticizing Wayne State's decision to pull the award named after Thomas, who grew up in Detroit and graduated from Wayne.
Who are the Arab American leaders who criticized the decision? The only one I can find so far by name is our old pal Ray Hanania, who called this blog an "often racistly anti-Arab and anti-Muslim hate site" and accused me of hypocrisy.

Let's talk about hypocrisy, Ray.

Hanania wrote the press release for the National Arab American Journalists Association criticizing Wayne State University:
The National Arab American Journalists Association Saturday denounced the decision to Wayne State University to terminate its annual Helen Thomas Spirit of Diversity Award, calling the move a cowardly act surrendering to racist hate.
Wayne State University, which has a large American Arab student population located in the heart of the nation's largest American Arab community, took the action in the face of pressure from Pro-Israel hate organizations angry because Helen Thomas expressed an opinion criticizing the influence of Zionist American organizations on American Foreign Policy.
Thomas, the keynote speaker at a Diversity Conference hosted Dec. 3 by ArabDetroit.com and attended by more than 300 participants, criticized those who attacked her for challenging Israel's actions in Palestine. She repeated her belief that the Zionist political movement in the United States "controls" the White House, the Congress and American foreign policy.

You forgot about Hollywood and Wall Street, Ray! Why would you not mention that part, I wonder? Because it proves that Thomas was undoubtedly using anti-semitic stereotypes! Better to ignore that and pretend, in your lying press release, that she was simply stating anti-Zionist views.


"The topic of Zionism is irrelevant to this debate. The real issue is free speech. Is America a nation of Free Speech or has our free speech been compromised by oftentimes vicious and hateful special interest organizations," said NAAJA coordinator Ray Hanania.
"This is America and America is the nation that is supposed to be the country of Free Speech. Instead of cowering in the face of pressure and special interest lobbying groups, journalists especially and other mainstream organizations should allow an open and full public discussion of the issues, controversial or not."
Let's get this straight. No one stopped Helen Thomas from speaking her mind - in fact, it was refreshing that it confirmed what most of us knew from her summer outburst about her desire for Jews, and only Jews, to "get the hell out" of the Middle East. She is perfectly free to spout her hate, hate that Ray Hanania is defending so vehemently. 

But, according to this self-appointed Arab American leader, Wayne State University does not have the right to pull an award named after her - a diversity award, no less. Their right to distance themselves from an old, unrepentant anti-semite is not a right that Hanania believes that they have. Their right to spend their own money as they see fit, and to choose who they decide is worthy of emulation - indeed, their own right to free speech  is being denied by Ray Hanania!

Hanania knows a thing or two about hypocrisy; he is a living example of it. 

People think of him as the model moderate Arab-American because he is against Hamas, and this points to the fundamental problem - an American of Arab descent who is considered oh-so-moderate is still someone who publicly defends explicit anti-semitism and who nonchalantly throws out libelous claims against others.

Ray is a liar and a hypocrite and I have documented it. Which is more than he has done when he labels other people and organizations to be "haters."

UPDATE: Once I'm calling Ray a liar, here's a doozy on one of his many websites:
 The Palestinians are ready to accept Israel's hold on most of the settlements in exchange for final borders, but Israel's Netanyahu is dragging his feet and demanding more. Netanyahu's version of Give and Take: The Palestinians give everything and Israel takes everything.
OK, Ray, please find a single public statement made by any Palestinian Arab leader saying that they were willing to accept anything of the sort. You won't find it, for reasons you know very well - anyone who says that would be assassinated. Just because you believe it doesn't mean that the PLO, or Hamas, or anyone in a position to matter does.

On the contrary, as I have documented, Mahmoud Abbas has bragged - publicly - that the Palestinian Arab negotiating position has not changed one iota since 1988.

It is a lie, and you are a liar.

Should I waste my time to find more of your lies, Ray? Or have we already established a pattern?

Sunday, December 05, 2010

From NPR:
Wayne State University won't be bestowing any more diversity awards named for Helen Thomas following more controversial remarks by the former dean of the White House press corps.

The university pulled the honor, the Helen Thomas Spirit of Diversity Award, after the 90-year-old said this week that "Congress, the White House and Hollywood, Wall Street are owned by Zionists. No question, in my opinion."

Thomas made those incendiary comments, according to a Detroit News report, before a diversity conference Thursday.

In an earlier report, the newspaper quotes a Wayne State official explaining the obvious, that the university had to put distance between itself and its famous alumna.

"The controversy has brought a negative light to the award, which was never the intent of the award," said Matthew Seeger, interim dean of the College of Fine, Performing and Communication Arts.
Even the very liberal NPR recognizes that Helen Thomas is a nasty old bigot with its (unprofessional but accurate) side comment of "explaining the obvious."

Wonder if Ray Hanania will figure that out for himself?

Friday, December 03, 2010

Helen Thomas, speaking in front of a group in Dearborn, kept up and expanded her anti-semitic diatribes - but this time she was careful to substitute the keyword "Zionist" to shield herself from truthful accusations that she is anti-semitic.

From the Detroit Free Press:
Striking a defiant tone, journalist Helen Thomas, 90, said today she absolutely stands by her controversial comments about Israel made earlier this year that led to her resignation. But she stoked additional controversy with new remarks, claiming that "Zionists" control U.S. foreign policy and other American institutions. The local Jewish community strongly condemned her remarks.

Thomas, who grew up in Detroit the daughter of Lebanese immigrants, was in Dearborn today for an Arab Detroit workshop on anti-Arab bias. The Free Press asked her about her comments, which critics have said were anti-Israel.

"I paid the price for that," said Thomas, a longtime White House correspondent. "But it was worth it, to speak the truth."

"The Zionists have to understand that's their country, too. Palestinians were there long before any European Zionists."

Thomas claimed that "You can not say anything (critical) about Israel in this country."
In a speech that drew a standing ovation, Thomas talked about "the whole question of money involved in politics."

"We are owned by propagandists against the Arabs. There's no question about that. Congress, the White House, and Hollywood, Wall Street, are owned by the Zionists. No question in my opinion. They put their money where there mouth is…We're being pushed into a wrong direction in every way."

Asked by the Free Press how she would respond to those who say she's anti-Semitic, Thomas said:
"I'd say I'm a Semite, What are you talking about? Who are you?"
Ah, the last refuge for Jew-haters - false semantics.

(h/t Yid With Lid)

Monday, November 22, 2010

I mentioned that Helen Thomas was honored in a Washington ceremony last week as the recipient of the "Courage in Journalism" award last week by the American-Arab Anti-Discrimination Committee. My conjecture was that she received her award not in spite of her anti-semitism, but because of it.

It appears I am right.

The person who presented the award to her was James Abourezk, former senator - and terrorist supporter.

When Abourezk gave a glowing review to the Walt/Mearsheimer book on the Jewish Lobby, I noted that he had been on Hezbollah TV praising Hamas and Hezbollah, and saying that Zionists were involved with the 9/11 attacks. This gave rise to a comment thread on the review site where he and I argued a bit. I'm fairly sure I won that argument, decisively.

Here's part of what Abourezk said at the Helen Thomas tribute:
from People's Cube
Even Barack Obama, who has been advertised as a tolerant man, had to join in the denunciations of Helen. He, along with the others in the press corps, acted very much like children in a school yard. When one of the children falls down, the rest start kicking.

Helen was not necessarily done in by her statement about Israel. What she said is what I’ve been saying for years - the Zionists should get the hell out of Palestine.

Where they go when they leave there is not my concern, just as it is not the Zionists' concern where the Palestinians went when they were driven out of Palestine.

...As the Zionists and the Israelis are working very hard to get our country into a war with Iran, there remains almost no voice in the press or in the Congress to call a halt to this madness.

That is why we are all paying tribute to Helen tonight, and I hope, for a long time after this night. We pay tribute to all soldiers who act with bravery, and tonight, we add Helen Thomas to that company. She deserves our thanks, and she deserves the thanks of our nation.
So indeed Thomas was not honored by the ADC for her decades of journalistic work but for her anti-semitic and genocidal comments about Jews in Israel.

And James Abourezk is proud to agree with her.

(The rest of his speech shows that his regard for the truth has not gone up at all since my little exposure of his lies.)

By the way, i see that previous award recipient Ray Hanania finds my earlier mention of Thomas to be reprehensible:
On the one hand, the writer argues that Helen Thomas did not say that Jews should get out of the occupied territory, making the precision of the words their strongest case. And then they hypocritically violate principle, morality and even truth, arguing that Helen Thomas said that Jews should get out of Israel. The fact is Helen Thomas NEVER used the word "Jews." She was asked by a racist rabbi what Israelis should do and she said "Get the hell out of Palestine."
And then that "racist rabbi" said to her "So you are saying the Jews should go back to Poland and Germany" and she added "And to America, and everywhere else."
Hanania knows this, of course, as he attacks EoZ as "an often racistly anti-Arab and anti-Muslim hate site."

Sorry, Ray, but you are a liar. Helen made very clear what she meant, and the video shows that. Your defense of her is indefensible.

UPDATE: Not that this is the first time that I caught Ray Hanania lying....

Thursday, November 18, 2010

The Arab-American Anti-Discrimination Committee is honoring an anti-semite tonight for her "courage":

The Detroit News reports:
Protests are expected today in Washington, D.C., when an Arab-American group honors Helen Thomas, the Detroit-raised journalist whose long career ended this year when she made inflammatory remarks about Israel.

Thomas, 90, is set to receive a "courage in journalism" award today by the American-Arab Anti-Discrimination Committee.

She resigned in May from Hearst News Service after telling an interviewer that Jews should "get the hell out" of the Palestinian territories and go to Germany, Poland or the United States. 

"By honoring Helen Thomas, who is clearly an anti-Jewish bigot, that makes a mockery of the ADC's ludicrous claim that the ADC fights discrimination," said Morton Klein, president of the Zionist Organization of America, a New York group organizing the protests.
Of course, Thomas didn't say that Jews should get out of the territories, she said they should get the hell out of Palestine, which obviously includes Israel in her mind (she didn't say they should go to "Israel" - to her, Israel is part of Palestine populated by Polish colonizers.)

More interesting is exactly when she was slated to receive this award. There was a Mehdi award winner in 2009 - Ray Hanania - but the one before that was in 2002. I could find no news of a nomination process for the 2010 award as there was in 2009.

It seems clear that her award, and probably the idea of offering the award altogether for 2010, was decided after her anti-semitic remarks, not before. Certainly the people who decide on the award didn't feel that Thomas was deserving of such an award for "courage" in the years 2003-2008 when they decided to forgo the awards altogether.

Her "courage in journalism" award seems to be for a single act of "courage:" telling the world that she wants all Jews to be driven out of Israel.

The ADC says:
ADC National Board Chair, Dr. Safa Rifka, states, "It is befitting to have this award presented at the Gala celebrating the achievements and courage of Helen Thomas. Like Dr. Mehdi, Ms. Thomas is a courageous pioneer who is proud of her heritage and pursues the truth."

ADC President, Sara Najjar-Wilson, stated that, "No one deserves the Courage in Journalism award more than Helen Thomas. Helen's unwavering dedication to her work, love for her country, and courage in asking the tough questions that no other person dared ask, are a source of pride to all Americans."
It appears that mainstream Arabs - ironically, especially the Arab American Anti-Discrimination Committee - are not the least bit embarrassed by Thomas' bigotry, and in fact they are celebrating it under the rubric of suddenly calling her "courageous."

Thursday, July 29, 2010

From the Detroit Free Press:

The Arab American National Museum in Dearborn has launched a fund-raising drive to pay for a statue of legendary journalist Helen Thomas that concerns some in the Jewish community.

Thomas, a former White House correspondent and native Detroiter born to Lebanese immigrants, was forced to quit her job at Hearst Newspapers last month after saying Israelis should "get the hell out of Palestine." She apologized.

On Tuesday, the museum started a 45-day campaign to raise the remaining $10,000 for the roughly $30,000 statue. Some in the Jewish community are wary of honoring Thomas.

"I just hope that the support for this memorial is there despite her anti-Israel and anti-Semitic views and not because of them," said Richard Nodel, president of the Jewish Community Relations Council.

Anan Ameri, director of the museum, said she disagrees with her comments, but Thomas "spent her life ... doing a lot of good things."

The campaign, which has a web site, has managed to raise $680 so far.

The museum has sought the sculpture for nearly a year.

If you are not eating, here's a picture. The statue is the one on the right.

Sunday, June 20, 2010

I posted a couple of days ago the hysterical reactions from some Israel-haters that Helen Thomas was "ambushed" by an ADL operative with the specific goal of getting Helen Thomas fired.

Here's that "operative's" own words, from the WaPo:
The day began with security checks. Then to the press room. A glimpse of former president Bill Clinton scurrying by with Vice President Biden. A press conference in the East Room with President Obama. An impromptu interview with the White House's mashgiach, the supervisor of the kosher kitchen preparation. Adam and Daniel were documenting the events for their Jewish teen Web site, ShmoozePOINT.com. I was interviewing people about Israel for a feature on my Web site, RabbiLIVE.com.

I thought that if I could create videos of short anecdotes about Israel -- the food, archeology, history and personal experiences -- they might go viral on the Internet and be a nice promo campaign for the country. I had started the project just a few weeks before.

Even as a rabbi, I did not count on divine intervention.

We were on the White House front lawn when I told the teenagers that approaching us was the most famous reporter in the world -- Helen Thomas, a veteran who had covered presidents from Kennedy to Obama. We stopped her. I told Thomas that the young men were starting out in the press corps and hoped to be reporters. She kindly shared notes about journalism with us. "You'll always keep learning," she said. It was an honor.

Then I asked: "Any comments on Israel? We're asking everybody today." Like saying a password to enter a new, secret place. "Tell them to get the hell out of Palestine," she replied, and "go home" to Poland and Germany. We were in.

The gentle give and take has now been broadcast, transcribed and thoroughly dissected. However, a strict transcription misses the accuracy of the audiovisual. Only in the director's cut, the video, are the nonwords, the sound, the noise, the true reaction. And that was my "oooh."

"What were you thinking when you said 'oooh,' rabbi?" asked Fox News, as did many of the other national and international media outlets that probed and jabbed for my innermost thoughts. Well, I was thinking "oooh." Oooh. Most heard it the first time. Certainly during the multitude of reruns, "oooh" became part of the song. It was a response by a rabbi to Thomas's comments, and it was from my soul.

I merely asked a question with a video camera to a columnist. She answered me with an opinion that was unacceptable not just to me but to former and current press secretaries, politicians, the president, her agent and a great many other people. Her freedom of speech was not stifled; on the contrary, it was respected.

She didn't say that the blockade was unjust, or that aid was not getting to Gaza, or that there was a massacre on the high seas, or that East Jerusalem is occupied, or that the settlements are immoral . . . and get out and go back to West Jerusalem, Tel Aviv, Haifa and Eilat. No. This was not the two-state solution. This was get the hell out and go back to the places of the final solution, Poland and Germany. The Jew has no connection with the land of Israel.

And why? Because, as Thomas went on to explain to me, "I'm from Arab descent." That's it? That's all you got? Do we all travel with only our parents' stereotypes to guide us, never going beyond them to get to a peaceful destination?

In the past weeks I have relived this moment over and over, on television and radio, in newspapers and blogs. I've listened to a constant stream of commentary. And my sharpest impression is this: Where before I saw a foggy anti-Israel, anti-Jewish link, it's now clear. This feeling is not about statehood. It's about an ingrown, organic hate. It's a sentiment that bears no connection to history, dates, passages or verses. Erase the facts, the dates and the lore.

My "oooh" was the sound of the shofar ram's horn calling a loud primal tikeya, the extended ancient whole note from my very core. My existence was being erased....Can we just rip away the history of Jews in Israel like a Band-Aid, one quick motion across the centuries? Oooh.

One may disagree on fences and rights of return. There have been handshakes, summits, accords, cease-fires, negotiations and boycotts. It's all been on the table, under the table or sometimes tabled. But the connection between the Jew and Israel is valid, historical, ancient, modern, spiritual and eternal. The relationship is beyond the state of Israel. It is a unique relationship of a religion to a land. The Jews are "bnai yisroel," the children of Israel. Even when they are away, they are connected. Even during exiles and diasporas, they are connected. Even during inquisitions, pogroms and a Holocaust, they are connected.

My grandmother used to kibitz, "Friends you choose; family you're stuck with." The Jew is stuck with Israel. There is no ungluing the connection. It is beyond the ambiguous term "chosen people"; they are "the people who have no choice." It is more than a religious belief; it is a value and a moral barometer of the Earth. History, truth, integrity and the foundation of our world are not negotiable.
And this is of course the point. Thomas wasn't offering a political opinion; she was revealing an ugly hate. One cannot separate her words from the purely anti-semitic idea that Jews have no connection with Israel. Her many defenders are pretending that she was "only" speaking about the "territories" - as if that it is any less heinous to say that Jews should make the center of their historic land Judenrein - but her words and the context of her age make it clear that to her, "Palestine" is any land that is controlled by Jews in the Middle East - no more, no less.

Thursday, June 17, 2010

When the Saudi Arabian-based Arab News wants to publish a bizarre conspiracy theory, they are careful not to use Arabs in the byline. They find one of the many nutty conspiracy theorist Westerners who write for far-left blogs and simply republish their rants, to make Arab conspiracy theorists look a bit less nutty.

A case in point: this bizarre, paranoid, anti-semitic rant by James Rockefeller:
Zionist operatives ambushed veteran White House correspondent Helen Thomas, a friend and a great American. When they won, America lost.

When reviewing the unedited video of her “interview,” what you see is a rabbi rephrasing her answers to a question about Israel. Her response: “They should get the hell out of Palestine.“ The United Nations long ago endorsed that stance.

It was not Thomas but the rabbi that offended the Jewish community. Language cited as “anti-Semitic” came not from her but from responses that the rabbi restated as leading questions. She simply spoke the truth: Jewish settlers should leave the occupied territories and, as she rightly said: “go home.”

The rabbi, an operative for the Anti-Defamation League, knew what he was doing when he ensnared this frail and distinguished 89-year-old journalist. The ADL and other Zionist strategists have long sought her removal from this influential position.

This operation was carried out as part of Jewish Heritage Week, a first in White House history. Nothing was said about the perils to which America has long been subjected due to its entangled alliance with the Jewish state.

The campaign to force Thomas’ removal was led by former Bush White House press secretary Ari Fleischer. Recall that Fleischer is the Zionist insider who repeatedly insisted that Saddam Hussein had weapons of mass destruction.

How did those seeking recognition for their “Jewishness” repay the trust of a nation and its people? Zionist operatives targeted the only reporter who challenged Israel’s nuclear weapons program. By bushwhacking her on the White House lawn, Zionists reconfirmed that they are, in fact, in control.

No one dared mention how Zionist Heritage has ravaged America from within. Or how Zionism was aided by a series of pathetic presidents and advisers offering their unflinching support for an increasingly unstable Israeli leadership.

....[Thomas] was the last mainstream American journalist who dared question a US president about Israel’s nuclear weapons. That’s why she was ambushed. [I reversed these last two sentences to make the excerpt clearer - EoZ]

Had Zionists not removed her, they knew she would have asked President Obama: “When is the US going to pressure its ally to give up a nuclear arsenal estimated to be in excess 200 nuclear warheads?”

Zionists won this round. No remaining White House correspondent is likely to ask the hard questions about Israel’s impact on America’s national security interests. ADL operatives, acting on behalf of a foreign government, made sure of it.

Meanwhile, Obama’s love fest with the Jewish state continues while Zionist policies persist in undermining America’s credibility and endangering US troops abroad.
Yes, Rabbi Nesenoff took his Flip camera to Jewish Heritage Week knowing that Helen Thomas would be hanging around so he could "ambush" her, and knowing that she would answer his open-ended question "Any comment on Israel" with a bigoted, ignorant and hateful rant.

Rockefeller probably thinks that Monica Lewinsky was a Mossad agent, too.

Monday, June 07, 2010

Soccer Dad asks:

I was unaware of the story behind Helen Thomas's outburst against Jews.
But I wonder what was wrong about what she said. 
 As he points out, Thomas' comments - that the Jews should get out of "Palestine" because, presumably, they have no legitimate history there - is the exact same position held by Palestinian "moderates." They still refuse to consider Israel a Jewish state (as opposed to the old days in 1948, when they made a bit more explicit their feelings that their entire problem with Israel was that it was a Jewish state.)

Thomas' feelings are widespread in the Arab world. No one in the West expresses disgust, or even astonishment, when Palestinian Arabs say that the Temples never existed or that the Western Wall was built by the Umayyad Muslim dynasty and is a part of the Waqf. The strong reaction to Thomas' statements could not be because those who are now so offended find the statements themselves offensive. It must be something else:

Helen Thomas, then, didn't say anything offensive. The belief she espoused isn't the problem, it's that she's a Westerner who did. For some arbitrary reason, denying Jewish history is offensive for her to do; had she been a Palestinian politician there'd have been nothing wrong with her statement.

Joe Klein, (via memeorandum) who now tells Helen Thomas to go to the back of the room, regularly vilifies Israel and those defenders of Israel, who - for good reason - are skeptical about the intents of the Palestinians.

The question isn't really what was offensive about Helen Thomas's remarks, but what's innocuous about similar remarks made by Palestinian leadership? If it's wrong for an individual to say that Jews don't belong in Israel, aren't you courting disaster by creating a neighboring state founded on that very principle?
It's more than courting disaster - it is effectively legitimizing the very offensive principle, in this case, by saying that Jews have no historic ties nor religious rights to the holy places and the heartland of ancient Jewish kingdoms.

Why is denying history and historic rights offensive for Thomas and accepted for Israel's ersatz, "moderate," "peace partners?"
From the Al Qassam Brigades English website (photo from their site as well):

Al Qassam website-June 6, 2010-White house correspondent Helen Thomas told Jews to get out of Palestine. In an interview with her, Jewish man named as David, asked Helen for her comment on Israel, she responded by saying: "Tell them to get the hell out of Palestine."

Turning her attention to the Palestinians, she said, "Remember, these people are occupied. And it's their land," adding the Jews should "go home" to Poland and Germany.

No doubt that Thomas Helen has told the truth that everybody in the world knows, but as American in a very important position , she was attacked by Zionists who went mad from the reality she mentioned in front of all people.

A document released yesterday on You tube, shows Thomas Helen while addressing Jews as " get out of Palestine because it does not belong toyou".

Thomas Helen directly accused by Jews and pro-Israel masses as anti-Semite Nazi.

Israelis ignore the reality, that they never belong in Palestine but belong in some other countries they know better.

Thomas when she asked by David , where Jews should go ? she replied him: "They should go home, German , Poland, America and anywhere else".

She also mentioned that "remember these people are occupied and it is their land , not German and not Poland".

This statement by Thomas Helen reflects the opinion of American majority in USA and all masses who support justice and peace in Palestine an whole world.

Moreover, her statement serves peace process in -Middle East- as they like to call it, to a very great extent.

Peace process will be successful, only when Israel get out of Arab Areas ,Golan and occupied Palestine, then we can say that peace is happily achieved, other wise, and as long Israel occupies Palestine and some Arab lands, peace will never be achieved and more headache will be brought to the world by state of terror-Israel .
Hamas also proudly reproduced the video on Hamas' Almoltaqa message forums.

The last paragraph should be read by every diplomat in the world who thinks that Israeli giving up more land will somehow cause Palestinian Arab claims - and Arab terrorism - to be minimized.

In reality, it would cause such terror to escalate.

Terror did not stop because of Oslo - it increased. Only a short time after Israel withdrew from Area A, giving full day-to-day autonomy to Palestinian Arabs there (well over 95% of them in the West Bank,) the terrorism increased markedly. It took a belated, tough Israeli response to the decade of terror attacks since Oslo to prompt the Palestinian Arabs (temporarily, in the timeframes in which they think) to reduce their attacks.

Israel's withdrawal from Gaza also did not stop rockets towards Israel - rather, after a brief relative lull, they increased. Only another tough Israeli response forced Hamas to (again temporarily) work to rein in the attacks (while claiming victory.)

Israeli concessions do not help peace at all - they embolden terror. The only serious deterrent to terrorism is a tough and consistent response that makes the terrorists realize that they have something to lose by their continued attacks. Westerners who pressure Israel alone to make concessions are giving the Palestinian Arab side precious little incentive to make any compromises for peace.

As this article shows, even the terrorist group the Al Qassam Brigades has taken the language and terminology of the "peace process" to be a weapon for them to achieve their goals to destroying Israel. Just as the Fatah terror group is now tactically repeating to the West via the PA that  there will be no peace until Israel leaves 100% the "occupied territories, " the Hamas terror group is saying the same thing - just their explicit definition of the "occupied territories" is all of Israel.

If Israel would give away 100% of the land gained in a defensive war against Jordan in 1967, the next step would be people demanding the Arab areas of the Galillee. Then Jaffa. Then would come demands for the land that Israel "occupied" in the 1948 war over the UN partition boundaries (not to mention the return of millions of descendants of refugees to their nonexistent homes and fields in Israel.) If Israel gave those back, then they would demand the rest of "historic Palestine" (and an apology from Britain for the Balfour Declaration.)

The pattern is clear and it can be seen in this article. It is not only Hamas - ordinary Palestinian Arabs also believe, deep down, that Israel will be defeated sooner or later.

I had mentioned in a post a few months back about visiting a friendly Arab pottery shop in Hebron, where I was invited to drink coffee and Mrs. Elder was given an opportunity to use the potters' wheel. A great deal of their business is from Jewish tourists to the Tomb of the Patriarchs across the street.

Commenter viiit wrote:
I went to the same pottery shop in January.

The same friendly Arab/Muslim has treated me to some coffee.

I asked him about the plate he hand hanging on the wall. On it there was the map of "Palestine" without Tel Aviv. (Jaffo was there.)

He explained to me that all of Palestine was Arab and that they will get it back. It was only a matter of time, maybe 2 years, maybe 10 years, maybe a little longer, but with NO DOUBT it will come back to the Arabs. He assured me with all sincerity.

I asked him what will happen to the Jews, he said that they will be asked to leave, and if they don't wish to leave voluntarily they will be made to leave.

I then told him that I was a Jew. Then suddenly he told me with equal conviction that he is a man of peace, and that he only wants peace, and that Jews and Arabs can learn to co-exist. Of course he would wish that Jews would leave on their own, but if they don't then he is prepared to live with them together.

He also told me that his grandfather had 2 wifes and 21 children and by now he has 140 grand children and more are coming.

I was astounded by his ability to express two contradictory stands , without even noticing that there was any contradiction. He was a well educated and quite wealthy man. I think that this quality of speaking out of two sides of ones moth is part of Arab and Muslim culture.

I instinctively distrust Arabs and Muslims.
This is not a lone example. Arabs have even told their leftist Israeli friends the same thing (shocking many of them.)  Whether one wants to generalize from this encounter to all Arabs and Muslims aside, it does illustrate that the Arab hatred for Jews (or at the very least the conviction that Jews should be at best a tolerated minority with limited rights) is far more than just political - it is cultural. But this is not something that you will see in op-eds by Arabs in the Washington Post or even in the Al Qassam website. They will happily use the language of the "peace process" to get the West to pressure Israel to help achieve their goals.

Nothing but continued and consistent Israeli strength can push that desire into the background. (It will never disappear, any more than the Muslim desire for Andalusia will never disappear.) The tactics may differ, and some may be more pragmatic than others about the possibilities of achieving the goal of a Palestine replacing Israel, but the goal has not changed one iota.

Helen Thomas has emboldened some to attempt to achieve it sooner rather than later, with the help of the US and clueless Europeans.

Believing otherwise is nothing more than wishful thinking, and too many in the West impose that wishful thinking on Israelis' daily lives.

(h/t OG)

AddToAny

Printfriendly

EoZTV Podcast

Podcast URL

Subscribe in podnovaSubscribe with FeedlyAdd to netvibes
addtomyyahoo4Subscribe with SubToMe

search eoz

comments

Speaking

translate

E-Book

For $18 donation








Sample Text

EoZ's Most Popular Posts in recent years

Hasbys!

Elder of Ziyon - حـكـيـم صـهـيـون



This blog may be a labor of love for me, but it takes a lot of effort, time and money. For 20 years and 40,000 articles I have been providing accurate, original news that would have remained unnoticed. I've written hundreds of scoops and sometimes my reporting ends up making a real difference. I appreciate any donations you can give to keep this blog going.

Donate!

Donate to fight for Israel!

Monthly subscription:
Payment options


One time donation:

Follow EoZ on Twitter!

Interesting Blogs

Blog Archive