Finkelstein's Embrace of Hezbollah

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Finkelstein’s embrace of Hezbollah I alerted our friend, Werner Cohn, about a fascinating “You Tube” video of Norman Finkelstein (posted on the Engage Website) being interviewed on Lebanese television. Werner posted it on his “Fringe Groups” Website. Finkelstein (a controversial historian with harsh anti-Israel views) is very clear that he admires Hezbollah and totally supports their war against Israel. He’s apparently disagreeing with the very attractive and dignified Lebanese woman who interviews him in Arabic. She cautions against violence and for a peaceful way. My point is not to defend aspects of Israeli policy that I dissent from. I see Finkelstein’s anger as over-the-top or even pathological. He honors Hezbollah, which can be said to have waged legitimate resistance to Israeli occupation but has gone beyond that to pledge unrelenting war against Israel, despite its total withdrawal from Lebanon. Hezbollah also embraces a Nazi- like “Protocols of Zion” level of anti-Semitism. Hezbollah was helped to prominence and a measure of power by the original Israeli invasion of 1982, a war that our Zionist movement (allied with Mapam at that time) opposed from the beginning. It was not a war that Israel intended against Lebanon but rather against the PLO armed elements that dominated the southern border, known then as “Fatahland.” Israeli forces were greeted joyously by Shiites and Christians, but they overstayed their welcome. In 1985, they retreated to the so-called security zone, jointly controlled with a Christian militia called the South Lebanon Army. They left abruptly and ignominiously in 2000, with Hezbollah celebrating a great victory. The Academy Award nominee, “Beaufort,” (now an also-ran) relates something of this story, but without political content. Regardless of the rights and wrongs of Israel’s bloody response, even Hezbollah’s leader, Hassan Nasrallah, admitted its mistake in triggering the war of 2006. Yet Finkelstein embraces their actions wholeheartedly. As for Finkelstein’s articulation of that so-called Jewish principle of “Never Forget, Never Forgive,” there is no such animal—certainly not as an aspect of Judaism. Some Jews may believe in this, but it’s not Judaism. Judaism is more represented by the practices of atonement and reconciliation encouraged during the High Holy Days..

Copy Link

Recommended publications

The BDS Movement: Why Israel?
Alex Feuerherdt The BDSMovement: Why Israel? The BDSMovement – Past and Present The BDS movement is currentlythe most active and best known anti-Israel asso- ciation. The abbreviation “BDS” stands for “Boycott, Divestment,and Sanc- tions.” Officially,the movement was founded in July 2005 by more than 170or- ganizations,supposedlyrepresenting the Palestinian civil society.Atleast,this is how the BDSmovement likes to tell the story.¹ Since 2005,BDS has gained many supporters,evenoutside the Palestinian territories, among them celebrities like South African archbishop Desmond Tutu, Britishfilm director KenLoach,Amer- ican philosopher Judith Butler, and ex-Pink Floydsinger Roger Waters.The BDS movement perceivesand describes Israel as an “Apartheid state,” like South Af- rica previously, and calls for acomprehensive economic, political,academic, and artistic boycott,aswell as for awithdrawal of investments, an embargo, and coercive measures.Thus, it targets the Jewish state as awhole. It is headed by Omar Barghouti,who, albeit having studied at TelAvivUniversity, accuses Is- rael of “Apartheid,”² “Nazi practices,”³ and “ethnic cleansing.”⁴ He categorically rejects atwo-state solution and maintains thatany dialogue with Israeliswould be “unethical” and “dangerous.” Another well-known BDS activist is Lebanese-American professor of politics As’ad AbuKhalil, who in 2012 said: The real aim of BDS is to bringdown the stateofIsrael. […]That should be stated as an unambiguous goal. Thereshould not be anyequivocation on the subject.Justiceand free- dom for the Palestiniansare incompatible with the existenceofthe stateofIsrael.⁵ Cf. “Palestinian Civil SocietyCall for BDS,” BDS Movement,issued July 9, 2005,accessed April 1, 2020,https://bdsmovement.net/call. O. Barghouti, “BesiegingIsrael’sSiege,” TheGuardian,August 12, 2010,https://www.the guardian.com/commentisfree/2010/aug/12/besieging-israel-siege-palestinian-boycott.
[Show full text]
Norman G. Finkelstein
Gaza an inquest into its martyrdom Norman G. Finkelstein university of california press University of California Press, one of the most distinguished university presses in the United States, enriches lives around the world by advancing scholarship in the humanities, social sciences, and natural sciences. Its activities are supported by the UC Press Foundation and by philanthropic contributions from individuals and institutions. For more information, visit www.ucpress.edu. University of California Press Oakland, California © 2018 by Norman G. Finkelstein Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data Names: Finkelstein, Norman G., author. Title: Gaza : an inquest into its martyrdom / Norman G. Finkelstein. Description: Oakland, California : University of California Press, [2018] | Includes bibliographical references and index. | Identifi ers: lccn 2017015719 (print) | lccn 2017028116 (ebook) | isbn 9780520968387 (ebook) | isbn 9780520295711 (cloth : alk. paper) Subjects: LCSH: Human rights—Gaza Strip. | Palestinian Arabs—Crimes against—Gaza Strip. | Arab-Israeli confl ict—1993– | Gaza Strip— History—21st century. Classifi cation: lcc jc599.g26 (ebook) | lcc jc599.g26 f55 2018 (print) | DDC 953/.1—dc23 LC record available at https://lccn.loc.gov/2017015719 Manufactured in the United States of America 27 26 25 24 23 22 21 20 19 18 10 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 Gaza praise for gaza “ Th is is the voice I listen for, when I want to learn the deepest reality about Jews, Zionists, Israelis, and Palestinians. Norman Finkelstein is surely one of the forty honest humans the Scripture alludes to who can save ‘Sodom’ (our Earth) by pointing out, again and again, the sometimes soul-shriveling but unavoidable Truth.
[Show full text]
Alan Dershowitz
Debunking the Newest – and Oldest – Jewish Conspiracy: A Reply to the Mearsheimer-Walt “Working Paper” Alan Dershowitz Harvard Law School April 2006 The author of this paper is solely responsible for the views expressed in it. As an academic institution, Harvard University does not take a position on the scholarship of individual faculty members, and this paper should not be interpreted or portrayed as reflecting the official position of the University or any of its Schools. L:\Research\Sponsored Research\WP RR RAO\WP response paper\Dershowitz.response.paper.doc Words count: 9733 Last printed 4/5/2006 1:13:00 PM Created on 4/5/2006 1:08:00 PM Page 1 of 45 Debunking the Newest – and Oldest – Jewish Conspiracy1: A Reply to the Mearsheimer-Walt “Working Paper” by Alan Dershowitz2 Introduction The publication, on the Harvard Kennedy School web site, of a “working paper,” written by a professor and academic dean at the Kennedy School and a prominent professor at the University of Chicago, has ignited a hailstorm of controversy and raised troubling questions. The paper was written by two self-described foreign-policy “realists,” Professor Stephen Walt and Professor John Mearsheimer.3 It asserts that the Israel “Lobby” – a cabal whose “core” is “American Jews” – has a “stranglehold” on mainstream American media, think tanks, academia, and the government.4 The Lobby is led by the American-Israel Public Affairs Committee (“AIPAC”), which the authors characterize as a “de facto agent of a foreign government” that places the interests of that government ahead of the interests of the United States.5 Jewish political contributors use Jewish “money” to blackmail government officials, while “Jewish philanthropists” influence and “police” academic programs and shape public opinion.6 Jewish “congressional staffers” exploit their roles and betray the trust of their bosses by 1 Article citations reference John J.
[Show full text]
Review of <Em>Gaza: an Inquest Into Its Martyrdom</Em>
Chapman University Chapman University Digital Commons Political Science Faculty Articles and Research Political Science Summer 2018 Review of Gaza: An Inquest into Its Martyrdom Nubar Hovsepian Chapman University, [email protected] Follow this and additional works at: https://digitalcommons.chapman.edu/polisci_articles Part of the Cultural History Commons, Islamic World and Near East History Commons, Near and Middle Eastern Studies Commons, Other History Commons, Other Political Science Commons, Political History Commons, Political Theory Commons, Public History Commons, and the Social History Commons Recommended Citation Hovsepian, Nubar. 2018. Review of Gaza: An Inquest into Its Martyrdom. Journal of Palestine Studies 47(4): 101-103. doi: 10.1525/ jps.2018.47.4.101 This Book Review is brought to you for free and open access by the Political Science at Chapman University Digital Commons. It has been accepted for inclusion in Political Science Faculty Articles and Research by an authorized administrator of Chapman University Digital Commons. For more information, please contact [email protected]. Review of Gaza: An Inquest into Its Martyrdom Comments Published as Hovsepian, Nubar. 2018. Review of Gaza: An Inquest into Its Martyrdom. Journal of Palestine Studies 47(4): 101-103. doi: 10.1525/jps.2018.47.4.101 © 2018 by Institute for Palestine Studies. Copying and permissions notice: Authorization to copy this content beyond fair use (as specified in Sections 107 and 108 of the U. S. Copyright Law) for internal or personal use, or the internal or personal use of specific clients, is granted by [the Regents of the University of California/on behalf of the Sponsoring Society] for libraries and other users, provided that they are registered with and pay the specified fee via Rightslink® or directly with the Copyright Clearance Center.
[Show full text]
Behind the Boycott
Promoters of BDS—the movement to boycott, divest from, and bring sanctions against the Jewish state of Israel—are open about their aim of pressuring Israel to relinquish land for a Palestinian state. What they less often share is that a two- state solution—Israel and Palestine living side-by-side in peace—is not their goal. THE ORIGINS OF THE ISRAEL BOYCOTT ven before the State of Israel was officially declared in 1948, with the endorsement of the EUN and backed by the immediate recognition of U.S. President Harry Truman, Arabs in British Mandatory Palestine and throughout the region declared war against the Jews. They sought to kill as many as possible, drive the rest out of the country, and end the Jewish state. That era of belligerency lasted over 30 years before Israel and its chief antagonist, Egypt, signed a peace accord in 1979. When it became clear that war could not defeat Israel, those seeking to bring Israel to its knees shifted tactics, and the Palestinian Intifada was born. It came in two waves of terror, running from 1987 to 1993 and then from 2000 to 2005. These surges were premised on the idea that Jews were foreign colonizers who, like European imperialists in the Third World, could be driven out by making the cost of staying higher than the colonizers could bear. But the Palestinians learned during their terror campaigns that the threat of physical harm would not end the Jewish state, because the Jews knew that they belonged in Israel. Next came the current stage in the long-running campaign against Israel—the movement to boycott, divest from, and bring sanctions against Israel, or “BDS” for short.
[Show full text]
Noam Chomsky Written by E-International Relations
Interview - Noam Chomsky Written by E-International Relations This PDF is auto-generated for reference only. As such, it may contain some conversion errors and/or missing information. For all formal use please refer to the official version on the website, as linked below. Interview - Noam Chomsky https://www.e-ir.info/2014/02/03/interview-noam-chomsky/ E-INTERNATIONAL RELATIONS, FEB 3 2014 Noam Chomsky was born on December 7, 1928, in Philadelphia, Pennsylvania. He received his PhD in linguistics in 1955 from the University of Pennsylvania. From 1951 to 1955, Chomsky was a Junior Fellow of the Harvard University Society of Fellows. The major theoretical viewpoints of his doctoral dissertation appeared in the monographSyntactic Structure in 1957. This formed part of a more extensive work,The Logical Structure of Linguistic Theory, circulated in mimeograph in 1955 and published in 1975. Chomsky joined the staff of the Massachusetts Institute of Technology in 1955 and in 1961 was appointed full professor. In 1976 he was appointed Institute Professor in the Department of Linguistics and Philosophy. Chomsky has lectured at many universities in the US and abroad, and is the recipient of numerous honorary degrees and awards. He has written and lectured widely on linguistics, philosophy, intellectual history, contemporary issues, international affairs, and U.S. foreign policy. Among his more recent books are,New Horizons in the Study of Language and Mind; On Nature and Language; The Essential Chomsky; Hopes and Prospects; Gaza in Crisis; How the World Works;9-11: Was There an Alternative; Making the Future: Occupations, Interventions, Empire, and Resistance; The Science of Language; Peace with Justice: Noam Chomsky in Australia; Power Systems; and On Western Terrorism: From Hiroshima to Drone Warfare (with Andre Vltchek).
[Show full text]
Whose Holocaust Isit Anyway?
A short story by Kevin Guilfoile p 18 The Empty Bottle goes to Norway p 10 Got a car? Then you can drag race. p 16 CHICAGO’S FREE WEEKLY | THIS ISSUE IN FOUR SECTIONS FRIDAY, AUG 26, 2005 | VOLUME 34, NUMBER 48 Whose Holocaust Is It Anyway? Why Alan Dershowitz wants DePaul professor Norman Finkelstein fired Chicago’s first all-cupcake bakery, Mamet’s The Cryptogram PLUS at Stage Left, James Frey’s latest wild memoir, and more Section One Letters 3 Fiction 18 “Zero Zero Day” by Kevin Guilfoile Columns Excerpted from Chicago Noir Hot Type 4 Reviews The shameful secret about civil-rights reporting Movies 30 The Straight Dope 5 Michael Winterbottom’s 9 Songs What was Able Archer? Music 32 Chicago Antisocial 8 The White Stripes’ Get Behind Me Satan Underground venues are dropping like flies Theater 34 David Mamet’s The Cryptogram at Stage Left Our Town 10 The Empty Bottle goes to Norway, one man’s Books 36 solution for flyers on his windshield James Frey’s My Friend Leonard August 26, 2005 Photo Essay 16 Plus “Run what ya brung” drag racing at Ink Well Route 66 Raceway This week’s crossword: Flat Features ON THE COVER: CHRISTIANE GRAUERT (FINKELSTEIN), PAUL HORNSCHEMEIER (GUILFOILE), MARTY PEREZ (EMPTY BOTTLE, DRAG RACING), YVETTE MARIE DOSTATNI (CUPCAKE) Whose Holocaust Is It Anyway? Why Alan Dershowitz wants DePaul professor Norman Finkelstein fired : CHARLES ESHELMAN , RIGHT RBIS CO : RICK FRIEDMAN/ LEFT Dershowitz, Finkelstein By Jeffrey Felshman he “worst enemies in the struggle against real at the top of the list he puts Harvard professor and anti-Semitism are the philo-Semites,”writes author Alan Dershowitz.
[Show full text]
What Happened on the Mavi Marmara? an Analysis of the Turkel Commission Report
TÜRKİYE ORTADOĞU ÇALIŞMALARI DERGİSİ Turkish Journal of Middle Eastern Studies Cilt: 1, Sayı: 2, 2014, ss.31-53 What Happened on the Mavi Marmara? An Analysis of the Turkel Commission Report Norman Finkelstein* Abstract On 31 May 2010, Israeli commandos killed nine Turkish citizens aboard the Mavi Marmara, the flagship vessel of a humanitarian flotilla headed for besieged Gaza. The Israeli attack evoked international outrage, which caused Israel to appoint an official commission of inquiry chaired by former Israeli Supreme Court Judge Jacob Turkel. In January 2011, the Turkel Commission released a 300 page report that allegedly established what happened in the course of the Israeli assault. In fact, and unsurprisingly, the report was a grotesque whitewash of Israeli acti- ons. Nonetheless this mendacious report effectively shielded Israel from further international scrutiny. A panel of inquiry created by UN Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon to resolve differences between Turkey and Israel over the Mavi Marmara killings “fully associated itself” - in the bitter words of the Turkish representative on the panel - with the the Turkel report’s findings. To date, no independent rese- archer has exposed in detail the dishonesty and fraud of the Turkel report. The purpose of my article is to fill this gap. Keywords: Mavi Marmara, Israel, Turkey, International Law, Turkel Report * Assoc. Prof., Sakarya University, Center for Middle Eastern Studies - [email protected] 31 TURKISH JOURNAL OF MIDDLE EASTERN STUDIES Türkiye Ortadoğu Çalışmaları Dergisi Vol: 1, No: 2, 2014, ss.31-53 Mavi Marmara’da Ne Oldu? Turkel Komisyonu Raporunun Analizi Norman Finkelstein* Özet 31 Mayıs 2010 tarihinde kuşatma altındaki Gazze’ye yardım götürmekte olan Mavi Marmara gemisinde bulunan 9 Türk vatandaşı İsrailli komandolar tarafın- dan öldürüldü.
[Show full text]
Stifling Dissent
STIFLING DISSENT HOW ISRAEL’S DEFENDERS USE FALSE CHARGES OF ANTI-SEMITISM TO LIMIT THE DEBATE OVER ISRAEL ON CAMPUS Jewish Voice for Peace Fall 2015 TABLE OF CONTENTS 1. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 1 STIFLING DISSENT 2 THE STRATEGIES 3 THE PURPOSE OF THIS REPORT 5 OVERVIEW OF THE REPORT: 6 RECOMMENDATIONS: 8 2. BULLYING INSIDE THE JEWISH COMMUNITY 10 2.1 HILLEL’S ISRAEL GUIDELINES 10 2.1.1. BRANDEIS HILLEL REJECTS CAMPUS JEWISH VOICE FOR PEACE CHAPTER – MARCH 2011 11 2.1.2 SUNY BINGHAMTON HILLEL FORCES STUDENT LEADER TO RESIGN – DECEMBER 2012 12 2.1.3 REJECTION OF UCLA-JVP FROM UCLA HILLEL – APRIL 2014 13 2.1.4. SWARTHMORE KEHILAH —MARCH 2015 14 2.2 MARGINALIZATION AND EXCLUSION BEYOND THE HILLEL GUIDELINES 15 2.2.1 UC-BERKELEY’S JEWISH STUDENT UNION REJECTS J STREET U – 2011 AND 2013 15 2.2.2 ATTEMPTS TO CENSOR THE FILM BETWEEN TWO WORLDS AT UCLA AND UCSC, 2011 17 3. STUDENT GOVERNMENT INTERVENTION 19 3.1 TRAINING JEWISH STUDENTS IN ISRAEL ADVOCACY 20 3.1.1 HASBARA FELLOWSHIPS 21 3.1.2 PRO-VIOLENCE PROGRAMS IN ISRAELI SETTLEMENTS 22 3.2. CULTIVATING NON-JEWISH ISRAEL ADVOCATES 22 4. REDEFINING ANTI-SEMITISM TO SILENCE SPEECH 24 4.1 TITLE VI COMPLAINTS 25 4.2 LEGAL THREATS AGAINST ADMINISTRATORS AND FACULTY 28 4.2.1. CONNECTICUT COLLEGE 28 4.2.2 ”WARNING LETTER” TO UNIVERSITIES 29 4.2.3 THREATS OVER CO-SPONSORED EVENTS 29 4.2.4 TARGETING FACULTY DIRECTLY 34 4.3 CODIFYING LIMITATIONS TO FREEDOM OF SPEECH 35 4.3.1 CODIFYING A DEFINITION OF ANTI-SEMITISM 35 4.3.1.1.
[Show full text]
1 “In Defense of Academic Freedom” Conference University of Chicago
“In Defense of Academic Freedom” Conference University of Chicago, October 12, 2007 John Mearsheimer’s Comments I would like to thank Tariq Ali for organizing this event and I would like to thank all of you for coming out today to hear us speak. Over the past six years, individuals and groups outside of academia have become increasingly active in trying to influence American academic life in ways that are antithetical to long-established traditions. For example, outside groups like Campus Watch monitor what academics say and write. Others have been pushing legislation that would cut off Title VI money to Middle East and other area studies centers that are considered biased by outsiders. Furthermore, outside forces have intervened in academia to influence hiring decisions and tenure decisions, and to prevent particular individuals from speaking on campuses. They have also put pressure on university presses not to publish controversial books. This assault on academic freedom is largely driven by the politics of the Middle East, especially as they relate to Israel. Universities are the one place in the United States where Israel tends to get treated like a normal country. It gets criticized for its past and present behavior in ways that rarely happen in the mainstream media or among politicians and policymakers inside the Beltway. Many hard-line supporters of Israel find this situation intolerable, which causes them to work very hard to stifle criticism of Israel and American support for Israel, and instead promote a positive image of Israel on campuses. I would like to talk in more depth about this phenomenon by examining Norman Finkelstein’s tenure case in some detail.
[Show full text]
Anti-Zionism and Antisemitism
Anti‐Zionism and Antisemitism: Cosmopolitan Reflections David Hirsh* INTRODUCTION 1. The research question Most accounts that understand antisemitism to be a pressing or increasing phenom‐ enon in contemporary Europe rely on the premise that this is connected to a rise in anti‐Zionism. Theorists of a ‘new antisemitism’ often understand anti‐Zionism to be a new form of appearance of an underlying antisemitism. On the other side, sceptics understand antiracist anti‐Zionism to be entirely distinct from antisemitism and they often understand efforts to bring the two phenomena together as a political dis‐ course intended to delegitimize criticism of Israeli policy. The project of this work is to investigate the relationship between antisemitism and anti‐Zionism, since under‐ standing this central relationship is an important part of understanding contemporary antisemitism. The hypothesis that this work takes seriously is the suggestion that, if an anti‐ Zionist world view becomes widespread, then one likely outcome is the emergence of openly antisemitic movements. The proposition is not that anti‐Zionism is motivated by antisemitism; rather that anti‐Zionism, which does not start as anti‐ semitism, normalizes hostility to Israel and then to Jews. It is this hostility to Israel and then to Jews, a hostility which gains some of its strength from justified anger with Israeli human rights abuses, that is on the verge of becoming something that many people now find understandable, even respectable. It is moving into the main‐ stream. An understanding of the rhetoric and practice of antiracist anti‐Zionism as a form of appearance of a timeless antisemitism tends to focus attention on motiva‐ tion.
[Show full text]
THE OCCUPATION of the AMERICAN MIND Israel’S Public Relations War in the U.S
THE OCCUPATION OF THE AMERICAN MIND Israel’s Public Relations War in the U.S. [Transcript] Introduction Text on screen: “It doesn't matter if justice is on your side. You have to depict your position as just.” – Benjamin Netanyahu, Prime Minister of Israel Narrator: On July 8, 2014, Israel launched a devastating military attack on the Gaza Strip. Over the course of 51 days, the Israeli military dropped nearly 20,000 tons of explosives on Gaza, a densely populated area the size of Philadelphia, killing over 2,000 Palestinians and wounding tens of thousands more. The overwhelming majority of these casualties were civilians. Television news montage: This strip of land is being bombarded from the air, sea, and land… Israel launched at least 160 strikes on the Gaza strip… And there’s one less hospital in Gaza now. Israel today flattened Wafa Hospital. Narrator: The sheer scale of the attacks sparked outrage and condemnation around the world. News anchor: Israel’s month-long pounding of Gaza shocked many people around the world. Mass demonstrations have been held in many of the world’s major cities. Narrator: But in the United States, the story was different. Polls showed the American people holding firm in their support for Israel. Anderson Cooper, CNN anchor: This is the latest CNN-ORC poll of Americans – shows 57% of those polled say Israel’s action in Gaza is justified, 34% say unjustified. Narrator: These numbers were striking, but they weren’t new. Over the course of a conflict in which Palestinian casualties have far outnumbered Israeli casualties, the American people have consistently shown far more sympathy for Israelis than for Palestinians.
[Show full text]