Wednesday, September 22, 2010

JPost Tears Into MJR

A reader that asked to remain anonymous pointed Zach and me to this well written but badly punctuated editorial about the IPF and MJ Rosenberg. Here are some selections from it.

"Claiming sole possession of the "pro-Israel" mantle and proclaiming a markedly pro-Palestinian agenda, Rosenberg declared, "We need to drown out the clamor produced by a minority within the pro-Israel community that tells our government not to press Israel to freeze settlements, ease the suffering in Gaza, or push hard to end the occupation that is destroying Israel's future and the Palestinians' present." Thus, in recent months the Israel Policy Forum "welcomed the shift [it perceived] in American policy toward Hamas," opposed "provocative" congressional bills directed at Iran, rushed to the defense of Chas Freeman when his very inappropriate appointment to the National Intelligence Council was challenged, lobbied against a "one-sided" congressional resolution supporting Israeli actions against the rocket-shooting Hamas terrorists in Gaza, and expressed opposition to a "loathsome" bi-partisan Congressional letter to the President encouraging support for direct negotiations between Israel and the Palestinians. This is pro-Israel?"
"Earlier this month the Forum's policy director rewrote Middle East history in chilling Orwellian terms. Israel should return to the 1967 borders after securing peace treaties, he wrote, because "pre-1967 Israel was not terrible at all. In fact it was pretty wonderful." [Emphasis added.] "Wonderful" is barely the way to describe the murderous fedayeen raids of the 1950s, the total ban on Jewish visits to the Western Wall or Cave of the Patriarchs, the abrupt withdrawal of UN troops from Sinai in 1967, the genocidal intentions of Arab neighbors and expeditionary forces, the failure of the United States to uphold its commitments to Israel, and the preparation of mass graves in Israeli parks"

" Writing an obituary for Israel's capital last week, Rosenberg pronounced "the death of Jerusalem," a city "divided by walls of hate." "The secular areas [of Jerusalem] are charming but much of the rest is Jewish Taliban country... No humor, no aesthetics, just lunatics in black. Can't all these black-clad crazies - of all faith and delusions - just recognize their common inhumanity and move to one corner of Asia." Rosenberg called on liberal Jerusalemites "who can't stand Talibanization" to move to the liberal, "hedonistic" Tel Aviv. (Emphasis added.)"
"Rosenberg's revulsion toward the Orthodox "Taliban, black-clad crazies" is at least as biased, but he spews his hatred on Jerusalem, as well. It may not be politically correct to label anyone an "anti-Semite" today. But what do you call someone who rejects the centrality of Jerusalem to the Jewish people or labels Orthodox Jews "fanatics, crazies, Taliban and lunatics?"
 Apparently, MJR is more violently opposed to actual religious Jews than any of us suspected. No question that some of the Hasidim are crazy, but to stereotype all of them is something Hamas does.

1 comment:

  1. This removes the last illusion that good ol' MJ Rosenberg is anything but anti-Israel.

    I don't necessarily agree with everything ultra-Orthodox Jews do but I respect their right to be observant Jews and to live as they wish.

    Its a pity such tolerance for Jews different from him isn't forthcoming from a supposedly liberal-minded Jew like Rosenberg.


Hey guys we've started to employ a slight comment policy. We used to have completely open comments but then people abused it. So our comment policy is such: No obvious trolling or spamming. And be warned: unlike the Huffington Post we actually enforce our comment policy.