"Self hating" Jews

[naomiglover]

Our numbers are starting to grow and this is becoming a problem for the "self-loving" Jews.

Not in our name.

[Jack Weber]

Naomi "The One Trick Pony" rides again...

[Shady]

These kinds of groups are as much about propaganda as anything else. While reading through their website, I couldn't find even a brief mention of any criticism of Hamas and any of its activities. Their view is basically a complete one-sided notion that Israel is to blame for the entire situation in the Middle East. It's really difficult to take groups like this seriously. If they tried to be at least a little balanced, they'd have much better luck. Basically, they're a far-leftwing activist group posing as a meaningful charity for peace.

Then I took a look at some of their members. Particularily their board of directors. I was familiar with one of the names, but couldn't remember why. A quick search refreshed my memory.

UNC Student Gets Hate Mail, from Professor

Link

However, genuine people like pro-Isreali Muslim Tarek Fatah are better examples of honest brokers of the Middle East conflict. He's been described many times as a "self-hating" Muslim, because he sides with much of the west, and of Israel. He's written a book called The Jew is Not My Enemy: Unveiling the Myths that Fuel Muslim Anti-Semitism. I highly recommend it.

[Jack Weber]

These kinds of groups are as much about propaganda as anything else. While reading through their website, I couldn't find even a brief mention of any criticism of Hamas and any of its activities. Their view is basically a complete one-sided notion that Israel is to blame for the entire situation in the Middle East. It's really difficult to take groups like this seriously. If they tried to be at least a little balanced, they'd have much better luck. Basically, they're a far-leftwing activist group posing as a meaningful charity for peace.

Then I took a look at some of their members. Particularily their board of directors. I was familiar with one of the names, but couldn't remember why. A quick search refreshed my memory.

However, genuine people like pro-Isreali Muslim Tarek Fatah are better examples of honest brokers of the Middle East conflict. He's been described many times as a "self-hating" Muslim, because he sides with much of the west, and of Israel. He's written a book called The Jew is Not My Enemy: Unveiling the Myths that Fuel Muslim Anti-Semitism. I highly recommend it.

Tarek Fatah is a good place to go...

I would recommend Salim Mansur,as well.When he talks about Muslim's,and their seeming collective aversion to self analysis (as it relates to the muder of the Prophet Mohammed's family at the hands of other Muslims,and how this has never properly been reconciled),he's onto something in the Muslim psyche.

Edited June 22, 2010 by Jack Weber

[naomiglover]

However, genuine people like pro-Isreali Muslim Tarek Fatah are better examples of honest brokers of the Middle East conflict. He's been described many times as a "self-hating" Muslim, because he sides with much of the west, and of Israel.

?

Tarek Fatah:

With Bush and Blair on one side and the ayatollah-Osama bin Laden axis on the other, Canada's Muslims are caught between the devil and deep sea. While we unreservedly condemn the Iranian president, we cannot remain silent about Israel's continued occupation of Palestinian territories.

Link

Edited June 22, 2010 by naomiglover

[dre]

Oh boy...

[Shady]

?

Tarek Fatah:

With Bush and Blair on one side and the ayatollah-Osama bin Laden axis on the other, Canada's Muslims are caught between the devil and deep sea. While we unreservedly condemn the Iranian president, we cannot remain silent about Israel's continued occupation of Palestinian territories.

Link

Yes, he's critical of both sides. You prove my point.

[Shady]

Tarek Fatah: Stop funding fundamentalism

Today, the CAF, a great Canadian institution built as a meeting place for Canadian Arabs of all political and racial hues, has been turned into a mouthpiece for Hamas and Hezbollah in Canada. The CAF used to support the peace process in the Middle East and held healthy debates on the pros and cons of the Oslo peace accord, but these days any backer of the two-state solution is automatically branded a traitor to the Muslim cause.

Link

In response to this article, the Canadian Arab Federation labelled Tarek Fatah "a house negro."

[naomiglover]

Yes, he's critical of both sides. You prove my point.

What point?

I thought you point was that he is 'pro-Israel'.

You even said: He's been described many times as a "self-hating" Muslim, because he sides with much of the west, and of Israel.

He obviously acknowledges that we cannot stay silent to Israel's occupation of Palestinian territories. So your assertion that he is "Pro-Israel" would only make sense if you think it would be pro-Israel to want Israel to abandon Israel's zealous and systematic land grab and leave the occupied territories. In which case, I would agree with you.

This is a simple case of someone not making this issue, as Bush famously put it: "You're either with us or against us".

He is condemning the wrongs on all sides. He condemns people like Ahmadinejad and Osama, while also condemning Israel's violation of human rights and law.

Since you speak so highly of Tarek Fatah, do you agree with him about the occupied territories? Or are you just as one-sided as those in the Ahmadinejad/Natanyahu/Hamas/Lieberman/Osama camp?

[bush_cheney2004]

...This is a simple case of someone not making this issue, as Bush famously put it: "You're either with us or against us".

....except that is not what Bush famously said.

[naomiglover]

....except that is not what Bush famously said.

No?

What about his "Address to a Joint Session of Congress and the American People"

Every nation, in every region, now has a decision to make. Either you are with us, or you are with the terrorists. (Applause.)

[bush_cheney2004]

No?

What about his "Address to a Joint Session of Congress and the American People"

Every nation, in every region, now has a decision to make. Either you are with us, or you are with the terrorists. (Applause.)

Correct...he didn't say "with us..or against us". You stand corrected.

[naomiglover]

Correct...he didn't say "with us..or against us". You stand corrected.

Heh. Right.

A straw man argument is an informal fallacy based on misrepresentation of an opponent's position.

Why the need to pull a Dancer?

[bush_cheney2004]

Heh. Right.

A straw man argument is an informal fallacy based on misrepresentation of an opponent's position.

Why the need to pull a Dancer?

Because lots of people like you corrupt what Bush actually said....and more importantly what he meant. I didn't pull a "Dancer"...you pulled a "Naomi".

[bloodyminded]

Because lots of people like you corrupt what Bush actually said....and more importantly what he meant. I didn't pull a "Dancer"...you pulled a "Naomi".

How was Naomi's trivial misquote a corruption of Bush's meaning?

[Guest American Woman]

naomiglover, on 23 June 2010 - 12:06 PM, said: This is a simple case of someone not making this issue, as Bush famously put it: "You're either with us or against us".

....except that is not what Bush famously said.

Whether he said it "famously" or not, according to CNN, he did say it.

"Over time it's going to be important for nations to know they will be held accountable for inactivity," he [bush] said. "You're either with us or against us in the fight against terror." link

[naomiglover]

Because lots of people like you corrupt what Bush actually said....and more importantly what he meant. I didn't pull a "Dancer"...you pulled a "Naomi".

The meaning of his quote is what I said. Give it a rest. You're engaging in pity argument.

[jbg]

Naomi "The One Trick Pony" rides again...

And again. And again.

[BubberMiley]

And again. And again.

And again, they are at a loss in defending their Israel-is-always-right position.

[Shady]

And again, they are at a loss in defending their Israel-is-always-right position.

As oppose to naomi's Israel-is-always-wrong position.

[naomiglover]

As oppose to naomi's Israel-is-always-wrong position.

You didn't respond to my comments:

Yes, he's critical of both sides. You prove my point.

What point?

I thought you point was that he is 'pro-Israel'.

You even said: He's been described many times as a "self-hating" Muslim, because he sides with much of the west, and of Israel.

He obviously acknowledges that we cannot stay silent to Israel's occupation of Palestinian territories. So your assertion that he is "Pro-Israel" would only make sense if you think it would be pro-Israel to want Israel to abandon Israel's zealous and systematic land grab and leave the occupied territories. In which case, I would agree with you.

This is a simple case of someone not making this issue, as Bush famously put it: "You're either with us or against us".

He is condemning the wrongs on all sides. He condemns people like Ahmadinejad and Osama, while also condemning Israel's violation of human rights and law.

Since you speak so highly of Tarek Fatah, do you agree with him about the occupied territories? Or are you just as one-sided as those in the Ahmadinejad/Natanyahu/Hamas/Lieberman/Osama camp?

[Bonam]

He obviously acknowledges that we cannot stay silent to Israel's occupation of Palestinian territories. So your assertion that he is "Pro-Israel" would only make sense if you think it would be pro-Israel to want Israel to abandon Israel's zealous and systematic land grab and leave the occupied territories. In which case, I would agree with you.

This is a simple case of someone not making this issue, as Bush famously put it: "You're either with us or against us".

He is condemning the wrongs on all sides. He condemns people like Ahmadinejad and Osama, while also condemning Israel's violation of human rights and law.

Since you speak so highly of Tarek Fatah, do you agree with him about the occupied territories? Or are you just as one-sided as those in the Ahmadinejad/Natanyahu/Hamas/Lieberman/Osama camp?

Anyone truly interested in Israel's longterm wellbeing recognizes that the best possible remaining outcome is a pullout from the West Bank and the foundation of an independent Palestinian state in the West Bank and Gaza. So of course it is "pro-Israel" to suggest that the occupation should end - eventually. The trouble, as people have explained to you many times, is security. When Israel pulled out of Gaza, terrorism from that territory only worsened. Israel needs to be completely certain of being able to guarantee its security before they can pull out of the West Bank and cease the blockade of Gaza. However, so long as terrorist groups rule, hold influence, or operate within these territories, Israel cannot be secure, thus the need for continued military operations, checkpoints, blockades, etc.

Really the situation has reached something of an impasse (and has been there for some time). Israel cannot pull out because they need to assure their own security, but terrorist groups continue to maintain their influence in these territories, and that is not likely to change given the enmity they feel for Israel.

Perhaps the only real solution is a technological one, if Israel can so utterly fortify its border against all types of attacks that they feel that they cannot possibly be harmed by anything that Hamas or other terrorist groups could do, they could then unilaterally pull out of the West Bank and cease all blockades without being threatened.

[jbg]

Our numbers are starting to grow and this is becoming a problem for the "self-loving" Jews.

You're either a self-hating Jew or a Jew hater. I don't know which to believe.

[Sir Bandelot]

You're either a self-hating Jew or a Jew hater. I don't know which to believe.

Or both... like some others, JBG?

[Jack Weber]

And again. And again.

Giddy up,Naomi...Giddy up....