Subject:
|
Re: ...just one more form of anti-Semitism
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.off-topic.debate
|
Date:
|
Mon, 1 Aug 2005 19:26:23 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
1096 times
|
| |
|
|
In lugnet.off-topic.debate, Scott Arthur wrote:
| |
Strange. It works for me.... but only sometimes.
Same story, but a different angle:
http://www.crisisisrael.com/displaycommentary.php?cid=195
|
PRESBYTERIANS, EPISCOPALIANS DISINVEST IN SENSITIVITY
Posted on October 7, 2004 10:01 PM EST Email this Commentary
By BRUCE S. TICKER Location: Philadelphia
Those Presbyterians and Episcopalians might as well have kicked and beaten their
mutual victim to a pulp while they were at it.
No, not Israel. The Palestinians. As the timeworn saying goes, the Palestinians
don’t need enemies with these kinds of friends.
Both the Presbyterian Church and the Episcopal Church have taken steps which
could lead to disinvestment of corporations doing business with Israel in the
next two years. They are accusing Israel of numerous transgressions in its
four-year-old war against the Palestinians.
Their approach severely costs them in credibility and therefore backfires on
their roles as advocates for the Palestinians. These efforts are marked by awful
timing, anti-Semitism, insensitivity, ignorance and spurious arguments. Did I
mention stupidity?
Legitimate criticism can only help Israel. It would serve to pressure the
Israeli government into reversing policies which jeopardize its own citizens.
But if church leaders are trying to help the Palestinians, they have a very
strange way of going about it.
But these advocates for the Palestinians would not recognize a legitimate
argument if it kicked them in the rump.
The church groups are considering disinvestment at a time when the Israeli
government is attempting to do things right. Israel’s plans to dismantle
settlements will get them out of the Palestinians’ hair, at least in Gaza and
part of the West Bank. That will allow for creation of a de facto Palestinian
state. Isn’t that what the Palestinians and their friends want?
Why don’t the church groups simply work with Israel and the Jewish groups in the
United States to help make this plan a reality? It is a foundation for the
future upon which all parties can build.
While disinvestment as a pressure tactic is debatable, the church groups should
at least wait until they have discussed their concerns about Israel with
Jewish-American leaders. No indication is given here that they have made such an
effort during the last four years.
The General Assembly of the Presbyterian Church (USA) took themselves out of the
running for believability when they accompanied their disinvestment vote with
their decision to maintain a missionary program aimed at recruiting Jews.
The Assembly currently supports a messianic church in Plymouth Meeting, a
Philadelphia suburb, which has been accused of attempting to convert Jews to
Christianity. Messianic Judaism is a misnomer because it means its members are
Jews who accept Jesus as their savior, which is literally blasphemy for both
religions.
Such a movement is brazen anti-Semitism. The very fact that they would
proselytize Jews means that they consider their religion superior to Judaism,
not to mention most other religions. No sophisticated person would be associated
with anything like that, and Presbyterian leaders should know better.
The media reported in the last few weeks that the Episcopal Church, representing
2.7 million members in the United States, may be asked to consider
disinvestments in Israel. The Rev. Canon Brian Grieves, director of the Anglican
Peace and Justice Network, would not confirm to New York Jewish Week whether
such a recommendation will be made to the church.
Grieves’ organization recently spent eight days in Israel, prompting it to issue
a statement blaming Israel for the crisis. The network represents 23 provinces
of the Anglican Communion worldwide, including the Episcopal Church in America.
According to Jewish Week, Grieves grew angry when asked if the church statement
was one-sided, saying, “When was the last time you visited the West Bank or
Gaza? Have you seen the wall up close, the miles and miles of settlements and
bypass roads, the checkpoints, demolished homes? It’s a pretty sorry state, and
I don’t know what it is if it isn’t collective punishment and a pretty obvious
policy to hold onto the land. It’s hard to draw any other conclusion.”
Wrong audience to lecture about “a pretty sorry state” and “collective
punishment.” Jews and other supporters of Israel with a longer memory than
Grieves can recall that the Palestinians were handed a golden opportunity to
create their own state, but they responded by starting a war. That cut short a
liberal prime minister’s political career (that of Ehud Barak) and assured the
election to prime minister of Israel’s own Darth Vader, namely Ariel Sharon. If
Grieves doubts that the Palestinians ever had such a chance for
self-determination, he should read Dennis Ross’s new book, “The Missing Peace,”
which confirms that Yasser Arafat lied about Israel’s final offer for an
independent state.
This is what Grieves said about suicide bombings as a factor: “Suicide bombings
are a reaction to the continuing occupation. Israel does bear responsibility for
the occupation.”
|
|
Message has 1 Reply:
 | | Re: ...just one more form of anti-Semitism
|
| Much of this article is filled with fallacy and nonsense arguments. The guy is upset but isn't doing a very good job of convincing me that his side is actually right. (...) How exactly does taking a stronger role in this issue de-legitimize the (...) (19 years ago, 1-Aug-05, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
Message is in Reply To:
5 Messages in This Thread:
 
- Entire Thread on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
This Message and its Replies on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
|
|
|
|
