 |
|
|
Monday, March 12 2007LA Times and Israel's "Right to Exist"A radical UCLA professor questions Israel's "right to exist". See HonestReporting's latest communique: LA Times and Israel's "Right to Exist".
TrackBackTrackBack URL for this entry: Listed below are links to weblogs that reference LA Times and Israel's "Right to Exist": CommentsWhy are universities and colleges full of Arab and Muslim hating professors? Why are they allowed to spread their ignorance? They should go and preach in their own countries and be kicked out of America. Actually, Prof. Makdisi, I had thought to include the I'm always amazed by the accuracy of the observation Gary Heller LA Times and Israel's "Right to Exist" The continued bias and naiveté of the LATimes is causing this country a lot of damage. Apart from its own journalistic coverage, the invitation to particular individuals to write their opinions is a “super” example of an organization that is agenda driven and not motivated by researching and reporting facts. What has happened to the journalistic and scholarly professions? Where is the intellectual curiosity searching for the truth? Where is the “high” standard of separating your own beliefs from the facts as far as they can be determined? The LATimes together with the New York Times and the Washington Post are by far the most important opinion leading news instruments in this country, and in the world together with the Financial Times in England, since many years. Journalists everywhere follow the “leads” by these papers and copy their views reporting it as facts (e.g. citing the LATimes or NYTimes as the source!!). I see this in my home country Sweden all the time. At the end of the day the development of the big city press in this country is a “super” business school example of what happens to a de facto local market “monopoly” that does not have to fear competition. But what we also know from business school is that this ultimately leads to the demise of the entity. When trust is broken there is no effective repair. However, with the local press monopolies the damage to society is far greater than that caused by a business monopoly. Arguing legal boundaries seems to be just another way to avoid any real peace initiative. However, if we must talk about boundaries, someone should remind the professor that the 1949 boundaries put the Gaza Strip in Egypt and the West Bank including East Jerusalem was part of Jordan. To David may I say that I have long ago given up on integrity as the watchword of journalists in relation to Israel. They have all decided in advance who the villain is (Israel) and simply write their stories to reflect their biases. Robert Fisk of the Independent in the UK although he is by no means alone. In Nick Cohen's excellent recent book 'What's Left' he reveals how the left lost its way. How can it be that the left which formerly espoused rights for oppressed minorities, marched in the streets of London howling both for Saddam Hussein and against the war which led to his downfall. These unthinking people have decided what they are against (Bush , Blair, Israel) but cannot find a voice for what they are for, probably because they would be too filled with self disgust if they did. I mean who in their right mind is going to say that they actually favour honour killings, suppression of women's rights, religious oppression, using your own children as human bombs? It's really unfortunate that the LA would allow itself to be used to continue to sustain and spread such lie.Whatever journalistic principle it may want to cite, it absolutely does not tally with the TRUTH- which shall be the guiding principle, anyway.LA, is the TRUTH that Israel should not exist? Rather than spreading hate subtly, and encouraging future genoide on those who believe others do not have the right to exist- such as the Iranian leader, the LA should save our world such agony by avoiding such publication. One wonders really what objective the LA wants to achieve. Israel is a reality, and there is no amount of wishful thinking that can wipe it out of the world map as some people think. Every right-thinking humanity should however watch out against the antics of LA and its ilks. I will persuade the LA to tender an unreserved apology to the entire humanity, not just the Jews or Israel, for providing space for just ungodly publication. Otherwise, serious campaign should commence immediately for every right-thinking person to avoid the paper, both in readership and advertisements. Who knows, the LA may tomorrow, begin a campign that even yours sincerely does not have the right to exist. The time to act is NOW! I am a Jew and a citizen of Israel. Can anyone define the State of Israel, whose citizen I am? Can anyone show me the territory over which the State of Israel is sovereign? Can anyone show me an official map of Israeli borders? Dr. F. Coter. Perhaps you already have done so, but it would be interesting for HonestReporting and perhaps CAMERA to join in trying to persuade the LA Times or the New York Times to compete against the Washington Post for a Pulitzer (their Walter Reed series) with an in-depth look at pro-Arab influence on college campuses, perhaps along with intimidation of Jewish students. Certainly enough anecdotal experience exists to justify such a series. The influence of Arab oil money in this equation also should be included. Prof. Makdisi has set academic scholarship back 20 years at UCLA. Perhaps their Academic Senate should become more academic. Makdisi, as a Professor of English may be very well qualified but as an Historian or Political Scientist he fails in both departments. I am indeed saddened by the comments of this seemingly learned man! If he were not so biased, but were prepared to engage in active research, he would also come to the conclusion that Israel has a legitimate reason for being in the Middle East. G-d has chosen them, even if many Jewish people cannot accept the fact that the G-d of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob, and the G-d of the Gentiles, has a plan and purpose for the Jewish people and the Arabs. Whoever curses Israel will also be cursed. Cursing does not have to be words. It can be apathy, or in the case of this professor, standing in blatant opposition to Israel. The times we are now living in are foretold by the Bible, and only the 'foolish' resist G-d! Recognition of Israel if is meaningless if eliminating violence doesn't come first. By the way, what do you mean what do you mean when you ask for URL? Isn't that the email? Sad to admit I don't fight hopeless causes...Mr. Makdisi may talk till he is blue in the face his listeners are brain-washed victims. Let him talk about the way the Arabs treat their own brothers. One of them may shut him up for good. Let us hope that Prof Makdisi does not get a chair in History. Let us hope the LA will never accept to print another article such as his. If it is acceptable to endorse hatred or destruction of a human being because of their race or creed or other affiliation or association, then it is acceptable to do the same to any other individual or group of any other identity; Thus the perpetrator of destruction of another, in turn can become the target of the same thing the next day. As I keep saying, it is futile to respond defensively to this nonsense. An effective response should be offensive, in both senses of the word. This is an argument, not a logical debate, and proper responses might be that the Arabs have broken peace treaties before, that they murder women and children, that they have in their state of Gaza nothing but violence, etc. Yes, this is irrelevant to the original calumny, but it's an argument, remember? You can't effectively respond to emotion with logic. To repeat, since no one seems to understand this simple concept: you can't effectively respond to emotion with logic. Got it? Or do I have to repeat it again? Congratulations Prof. Gary Heller for accurately giving a brief history of so called "Palestine". This name was given to the land of the Jews by the Romans in the 1st century. It endured being defined in various dictioneries until recent times as the "Land of the Jews". It was only populated by Arab immigrants from neighbouring Syria and Egypt etc. when Jews from Europe started returning home from the latter part of the 19th century and making the desert bloom again. Islamic geopolitical ambitions siezed the opportunity to encompass one more prize to their expansionist hegemony as is evident in huge tracts of Africa, Central Europe and Asia. I live in Sydney, Australia and have witnessed media reports that Islamic leaders in our country are openly advocating for a Pan-Islamic state encompassing all territories between Muslim Indonesia (by the way the original inhabitants of that country were Hindu) and the Phillipenes including Australia. Demonization of Israel is only a tool and smokesceern for further Islamic expansion. Israel is blamed for all the Arab and Muslim woes. Soon we may even hear that the ethnic clensing and genocide committed in Darfur be blamed on Israel. Wake up world media and recognize this scourge of Islamic expansionism for what it is! Of Course Makdisi is right-Why should Israel be begging for "recognition of its right to exist" from a group of rag-tag terrorists. I'm sick and tired of Israeli's stupidy. They should never have "regognized" the PLO just because the Arab League said the PLO represents the Palestinains Arabs. Who care what the Arab league says. Israel was stupid. Of course Israel should have annexed the West Bank and Gaza and expelled the Arabs in 1967. What stopped them: George Bush? They were stupid not to have done that. Israel was stupid to get into the Oslo idodicy. Why are the Israelis so dumb? Are they really that dumb or are they really cowards. You and I know what has to be done to solve the "Arab-Israeli Conflict". Calling the Arabs "Palestinians" does not change anything. It's still the Arabs Israel needs to have come to their senses. There will never be two states for two peoples. That's a lot of bunk. Load your weopons and get it over with--or I'm giving up on Israel--the can move to Uganda! From all of the comments I read not even one of you has mentioned the rich history of the Jewish people during the bible days and Archeology discovery’s with proven artifacts that stands witness to Israel past in this land. There were no Palestinians before 1948 and those so called Palestinians have adopted that name that the Romans have given to a rebellious tribe at that time. Ask them what history they have and how could their god go to heaven from two places, once fro Mecca and once from Jerusalem.{Muhamad was never in Jerusalem that they all claim.} Regarding land that belong to them, what about properties that have been taken from the Jews in Arab States. Ruthy.L Prof. Makdisi clearly does not wish to even see the Palestinians reap any benefit but to embolden them to carry out more suicide missions and blindly continue their path of destruction. His hate mongering rhetoric is a prescription for more war and killing . He is only interested in Israel's annilhation with the pretext of helping his Palestinians. MArty Hubert, The fact that you published the multi-inaccuracy containing piece by someone named Saree Madkisi makes me question the LA Times' right to exist. The biggest risk to Israel is the fraudulent "peace process". Before the "peace process", Israel was respected by friend and foe alike. Today nobody respects Israel, including the Israeli government. It's been a never ending series of Israeli concessions, Arab lies, rocket attacks on ISraeli civilians (brought within range by the idiotic Deportation Plan), thousands of Israelis murdered and tens of thousands maimed for life. To heck with the sick, perverse "peace process". The real question here is: Whose land is this? No "peace process" will resolve it. Israel needs and deserves VICTORY, not another fraudulent, perverse "peace process". "Palestine," never having been a sovereign country, seems to have been defined geographically differently over time. If you look in the pre-WWI Encyclopedia Britannica, a time when the Ottomans ruled "Palestine" for hundreds of years, the map shows that "Palestine" historically consisted of what is now southern Lebanon (including Beirut), southwestern Syria (including Damascus), the western third of Jordan and the northern 2/3rds of Israel (not including the Negev desert.) After WWI, "Palestine Mandate" consisted on what is essentially Jordan and Israel, which although mandated by the League of Nations as a Jewish homeland, was later divided by the British, giving approximately 80% of "Palestine" to the Hashemites (who originate from Arabia) to rule. Current "Palestine" amazingly seems to follow the exact territory under Jewish control! I thought Makdisi's article was exactly right. Your rebuttal makes a few mistakes. "Makdisi muddies the issue of "recognition" in legalistic jargon while failing to acknowledge that the issue goes deeper than this in practical terms, as Hamas not only refuses to recognize Israel but actually advocates its destruction." As you say, Hamas goes beyond not recognising Israel to being opposed to EVER recognising it. That's no argument against not recognising Israel in its current, ethnically-cleansed, form. "Israel and the Palestinians recognized each other by signing the Oslo Accords..." The Pals recognised Israel, but Israel only recognised the PLO to be the legitimate representative of the Palestinian people. Israel has never recognised that the Pals have any right to a state in Palestine. Makdisi says: "A just peace will require Israelis and Palestinians to reconcile and That's all. Mr. Lerner is correct, it is futile to argue emotion with logic. If this were a logical situation, there would be an open discussion within that society (and not under threat of fatwas for those who speak up) of why a whole culture has grown up around suicide, or rather homicide bombings and using children to do this (which basically amounts to child abuse, esp when they are "the future"), martyrdom, and acquiring weapons rather than establishing an infrastructure required to maintain a population. They have made their choices and, being unable to acknowledge this failure of a society, are seeking to play the blame game; it is always psychologically easier to scapegoat others and bully than to do the hard work of admitting their own shortcomings and needing to change. See where you all have it wrong is you are making this a religous issue. It is not. Say the UN decides that the Cubans are being mistreated, I am not saying they are or are not, and they need a new place to go. So they decide that Florida is the place they should be. They now take all the land that my family has passed down from generation to generation, and give it to a nice Cuban family. Am I gonna sit back and say ok, no problem, I just start over again? No, I am going to fight and I am going to raise my children to fight for this injustice. Everyone wants to make this a religous issue and it is not. The land was theirs. Now a new family is living in their home and walls are being built. Why shouldn't they be mad. Why should they be the one to "make nice?"
Next
»
Post a comment[Comments are held for approval before appearing.]
|
