One can see the hate and bias right in the headline:" Close Presbyterian Vote on Selective Divestment Shows Likudniks Losing Middle America." Have you got that? You either think that Israel should be boycotted and wiped out of you are a "Likudnik." Never mind that every American Jewish organizations from J Street to ZOA stands against divestment, along with 99.9999% of mainstream American institutions. Apparently we are all "Likudniks" in the mind of Robert Naimnan.
We'll continue with the Jew baiting since that is most obvious just to get it out of the way. Even though pro-Israel organizations actually weren't particularly involved with this vote, and everyone was expecting to pass, according to Mr. Naiman and his Huffington Post editors the only reason why a single Presbyterian voted against his enlightened point of view was because of the nefarious Jews. Don't believe me? Let's quote the man himself (emphasis mine):
Wait a second, what the hell do you mean "falsely?" What is BDS if not "economic leverages?" That's what boycotts means! That's what every single proponent of BDS ever has told us right from the very beginning. But hang on, because Naiman is now going to try and spin this even further:"No doubt many among what Peter Beinart calls "the American Jewish establishment" celebrated the result. They had pulled out the stops to block the Presbyterians' selective divestment move. 1300 rabbis and 22,000 other Jews wrote to the Presbyterians, falsely seeking to characterize the proposed move as "the use of economic leverages against the Jewish state.""
That's some pretty heavy spin doctoring right there. If the divestment resolution had won (and that's what even its supporters are calling it) Mr. Naiman would be running out into the street like everyone else to declare that the Presbyterians have indeed "divested from Israel." Only in defeat does he try to make it sound like it was only every about the "occupation." He fails anyways because boycotting companies that do business with Israel in order to get those businesses to not sell to Israel is indeed "economic leverages." So he is still wrong, and as we will get to in our next post, he is going to be humiliated further."Yet as The Rev. Gradye Parsons, stated clerk of the PCUSA General Assembly, explained in the Washington Post, the resolution was opposed to specific actions of particular companies linked to the occupation, leaving investments in many other companies doing business in Israel untouched. And therefore, claims that the Presbyterians were contemplating "divesting from Israel" or "boycotting Israel" were disinformation; disinformation that, in the short-run, may have proved successful."
But hang on, because it's time to bash the Jews some more!
Can you spot the anti-Semitism in this paragraph, ladies and germs? According to Robert Naiman the Presbyterians aren't human beings who are responsible for their own behavior. The only group that can manipulate people are American Jews, because he would never say that the BDS campaigners with all their intimidate lies and thuggery still came up with failure. Oh no, every vote against divestment was bought and paid for the by "American Jewish establishment." Nothing hateful there, certainly not from a Hamas supporter."The fact that the "American Jewish establishment" could only muster a two-vote majority at the PCUSA General Assembly shows what the future holds for the Likudniks if they do not change their policies towards the Palestinians."
By the way, as DivestThis pointed out, divestment actually won in 2004. You may have noticed that the world did not end. So this remains a step backwards, not a step forward. But we can't expect someone like Robert Naiman to actually tell the truth. That's not why the Huffington Post hired him after all.
At this point he returns to petty bickering and lying, like the TIAA-CREF myth that has been long debunked, quoting from pro-boycotters to explain too late why the Presbyterians made the wrong decision, and the endless hope that 2014 will be different. Also, ready for some irony?
Yeah, it's kind of ironic that you mention gay rights:
"The writing is on the wall. As with attitudes towards gay rights, there is a huge generation gap in how American Jews and non-Jews view the Israeli occupation..."
No doubt if divestment had won, Naiman would have been the first to declare the Presbyterian Church to be an "arbiter of morality" or some bullshit. As it stands, I don't think this clear anti-gay bigotry is going to prompt an article from our bastion of human rights.
After a disgusting article demanding that Israel, the Jewish state, be singled out for mistreatment, Naiman engages in some final Jew baiting.
But then, it isn't the first time he has exploited Jews to help people who would destroy the Jews utterly. What else is new on the Huffington Post?"Let the American Jewish establishment take heed, and turn away from the path of defending injustice. Tzedek, tzedek, tirdof - justice, justice, shall you pursue."