Yes but you expect people to think. People don't want to think. They want quick and easy. Your whole essay means nothing beside one lying, incendiary meme. Some barbaric image of suffering that may or may not have anything to do with Gaza/West Bank along with some flagrantly lying accusation the length of a sound byte, and the viewer is off to the races, they didn't have to wade through paragraphs. We expect people to think. People don't want the trouble. Essays can't compete with a campaign that targets the amygdala. Reptile brains? That is what we're dealing with, "educated" or not, because we now live in an age where indoctrination takes the place of education and few people have critical thinking skills. Where are all the great Jewish advertising minds? They need to get to work.
Except that it is inciting violence, the chanting and slogans are so infantile it’s ludicrous. Witness the US campus “scholars”repeating phrase after phrase to intimidate and prevent Jewish students from accessing class. The mass keffiyeh clad virtue signaling is another childish affectation that simply won’t free Palestinians.
Excellent, as always, Pat. While it's true that none of this activity has helped Palestinians, I would note that the decades of amorality and ahistoricity on the part of the anti-Israel crowd has and does make a difference to Jews and Israelis. Witness the worldwide attacks on Jewish businesses and Israelis in Amsterdam as just two examples.
Excellent read! The only critique I have is Said is not actually a historian which makes his positioning even worse imo. He was a “literary and cultural critic”, which is why as someone who is an anthropologist and actual historian (along with being a zionist), the man and his legacy make me have heartburn 😂.
The late South African bishop Desmond Tutu claimed that Israel was "worse than apartheid", although as far as I know, never bothered to explain the basis of his claim.
Last Thursday, May 8th, CBC's The Current had two guests on to talk about the current state of affairs in Gaza. The first was U BC professor of political science and international law, Michael Byers, denouncing Israel's decision to suspend aid deliveries in March as a violation of international law. Naturally, Byers made no mention of the claims of famine that ended up being found lacking evidence by the UN's own internal review committee, nor aid deliveries had far exceeded actual requirements. (Conveniently, Reichman University political scientist Shany Mor happened to publish an op-ed a few days earlier demonstrating the "two tiered" application of international law as it is applied to Israel that rubbishes Byers's claim:
The second guest was the Gazan lawyer who helped spearhead the "We want to live" anti-Hamas protests in Gaza, through the mediation of an interpreter. It was mildly shocking to hear show host Matt Galloway's intro in which he, Galloway, described Hamas's rule as "tyrannical" but this comment doesn't seem to have made it to the transcript the CBC has shared online. (I haven't bothered listening to the podcast's audio. I know what I heard.)
Thanks for this link - I shudder when I hear the CBC platforming hypocritical critics of Israel, as Galloway’s first guest was, but his second guest - if he was being honest - said more about Gazans’ true view of Hamas than any western commentators. I did find the reference to the “tyranny” of Hamas, when Galloway quotes the Gazan lawyer’s use of the word in his WaPo article: “you wrote in The Washington Post, despite the headlines our protests have generated, the organized pro-Palestinian network in the United States has not yet risen to the challenge of supporting Gazans in our push for freedom from the tyranny of Hamas.” For what it’s worth.
Words matter, as we’re endlessly told, which is why we need to stop calling anti-Israel, anti-Zionist and antisemitic thugs “pro-Palestinian”, when they’re nothing of the sort.
They know and could care less about Palestinians or about their cause. Their social activism is nothing more than virtue signalling and a thin veneer to hide their true agenda: the opportunity to express, loud and proud, their good old fashioned, centuries-old Jew hatred. By calling them pro-anything, we’re legitimizing as positive an ideology that’s the very opposite.
I hear what you are saying. What should we call them that encompasses all their attitudes? Anti Israel, anti Zionist and antisemitic, which covers all bases, doesn’t roll off the tongue like pro Palestinian or pro terrorist.
This is a problem! We have a core messsaging problem. Their ideology sounds optimistic, positive and aspirational (“Free Palestine!”) even tho it is anything but. Our is not only negative (fighting antisemitism) and then even the adjective is a DOUBLE negative (‘anti-antisemitism”). It may seem like a minor thing. But it’s not.
For years Israel has been indifferent to defending itself on the stage of world opinion. That attitude has come home to roost. Meanwhile the Palestinian cause has worked on its propaganda so effectively that millions of people support them in spite of all the terrorist atrocities in the west over the last 50+ years.
“Pro Palestinian” may be a clumsy descriptor but it’s a skirmish in the battle of the word war.
So why oh why, are there so many people pursuing this fake notion of a palestinian narrative, people and a possible homeland ? how come the palestinian narrative seems to be winning the pr battle .. ?
The desire to subjugate the Jews has always been at the heart of antisemitism--and there is a variation of it that may be termed subjugation through "scholarship."
Yes but you expect people to think. People don't want to think. They want quick and easy. Your whole essay means nothing beside one lying, incendiary meme. Some barbaric image of suffering that may or may not have anything to do with Gaza/West Bank along with some flagrantly lying accusation the length of a sound byte, and the viewer is off to the races, they didn't have to wade through paragraphs. We expect people to think. People don't want the trouble. Essays can't compete with a campaign that targets the amygdala. Reptile brains? That is what we're dealing with, "educated" or not, because we now live in an age where indoctrination takes the place of education and few people have critical thinking skills. Where are all the great Jewish advertising minds? They need to get to work.
Sad truths.
Antizionism is a club for broken, defective people.
Except that it is inciting violence, the chanting and slogans are so infantile it’s ludicrous. Witness the US campus “scholars”repeating phrase after phrase to intimidate and prevent Jewish students from accessing class. The mass keffiyeh clad virtue signaling is another childish affectation that simply won’t free Palestinians.
Excellent, as always, Pat. While it's true that none of this activity has helped Palestinians, I would note that the decades of amorality and ahistoricity on the part of the anti-Israel crowd has and does make a difference to Jews and Israelis. Witness the worldwide attacks on Jewish businesses and Israelis in Amsterdam as just two examples.
Excellent read! The only critique I have is Said is not actually a historian which makes his positioning even worse imo. He was a “literary and cultural critic”, which is why as someone who is an anthropologist and actual historian (along with being a zionist), the man and his legacy make me have heartburn 😂.
Only heartburn? They give me dysentery.
Fair enough 😂 though I have a hard time telling if they gave me dysentery or if its just my ibs 😂
The late South African bishop Desmond Tutu claimed that Israel was "worse than apartheid", although as far as I know, never bothered to explain the basis of his claim.
Last Thursday, May 8th, CBC's The Current had two guests on to talk about the current state of affairs in Gaza. The first was U BC professor of political science and international law, Michael Byers, denouncing Israel's decision to suspend aid deliveries in March as a violation of international law. Naturally, Byers made no mention of the claims of famine that ended up being found lacking evidence by the UN's own internal review committee, nor aid deliveries had far exceeded actual requirements. (Conveniently, Reichman University political scientist Shany Mor happened to publish an op-ed a few days earlier demonstrating the "two tiered" application of international law as it is applied to Israel that rubbishes Byers's claim:
https://www.thejc.com/opinion/the-wests-two-tier-international-law-doesnt-harm-just-israel-rn074p4m)
The second guest was the Gazan lawyer who helped spearhead the "We want to live" anti-Hamas protests in Gaza, through the mediation of an interpreter. It was mildly shocking to hear show host Matt Galloway's intro in which he, Galloway, described Hamas's rule as "tyrannical" but this comment doesn't seem to have made it to the transcript the CBC has shared online. (I haven't bothered listening to the podcast's audio. I know what I heard.)
https://www.cbc.ca/radio/thecurrent/thursday-may-8-2025-episode-transcript-1.7530412
Thanks for this link - I shudder when I hear the CBC platforming hypocritical critics of Israel, as Galloway’s first guest was, but his second guest - if he was being honest - said more about Gazans’ true view of Hamas than any western commentators. I did find the reference to the “tyranny” of Hamas, when Galloway quotes the Gazan lawyer’s use of the word in his WaPo article: “you wrote in The Washington Post, despite the headlines our protests have generated, the organized pro-Palestinian network in the United States has not yet risen to the challenge of supporting Gazans in our push for freedom from the tyranny of Hamas.” For what it’s worth.
Thanks for letting me know that at least someone speaking about Hamas on the CBC -- a Gazan no less -- was able to accurately describe Hamas.
If you haven't also read Shany Mor's op-ed, it's well worth the time if you have it.
Words matter, as we’re endlessly told, which is why we need to stop calling anti-Israel, anti-Zionist and antisemitic thugs “pro-Palestinian”, when they’re nothing of the sort.
They know and could care less about Palestinians or about their cause. Their social activism is nothing more than virtue signalling and a thin veneer to hide their true agenda: the opportunity to express, loud and proud, their good old fashioned, centuries-old Jew hatred. By calling them pro-anything, we’re legitimizing as positive an ideology that’s the very opposite.
I hear what you are saying. What should we call them that encompasses all their attitudes? Anti Israel, anti Zionist and antisemitic, which covers all bases, doesn’t roll off the tongue like pro Palestinian or pro terrorist.
This is a problem! We have a core messsaging problem. Their ideology sounds optimistic, positive and aspirational (“Free Palestine!”) even tho it is anything but. Our is not only negative (fighting antisemitism) and then even the adjective is a DOUBLE negative (‘anti-antisemitism”). It may seem like a minor thing. But it’s not.
For years Israel has been indifferent to defending itself on the stage of world opinion. That attitude has come home to roost. Meanwhile the Palestinian cause has worked on its propaganda so effectively that millions of people support them in spite of all the terrorist atrocities in the west over the last 50+ years.
“Pro Palestinian” may be a clumsy descriptor but it’s a skirmish in the battle of the word war.
So why oh why, are there so many people pursuing this fake notion of a palestinian narrative, people and a possible homeland ? how come the palestinian narrative seems to be winning the pr battle .. ?
They certainly should have a homeland in the Nejd or the Hejaz.
The desire to subjugate the Jews has always been at the heart of antisemitism--and there is a variation of it that may be termed subjugation through "scholarship."