At the present time, by almost any measurable standard, the situation for Palestinians in their homeland and the prospect for their future is as bad as at any time since 1948 and the same applies to those who have suffered for years in the refugee camps. Given that grim outlook, I would direct attention to a most curious phenomenon which may or may not have some bearing on the problem. I happen to think it does and so, I believe, will you after reading this. Can anyone imagine, 65 years after the Palestinian Nakba, that the foremost “expert” and the most sought after speaker on the subject both in the United States and abroad, even by Palestinians, would be a Jewish American who : - Is an admitted Zionist and supporter of Israel who at one time considered living there; - Despite the ethnic cleansing of 750,000 Palestinians and the destruction of nearly 500 of their villages, that after 1948, writes that Israel should have been treated as any other state as if the Nakba hadn’t happened; - Who believes the demands of Palestinians for their right to return to their homeland as provided by UN Res. 194 is unrealistic and they should be discouraged from raising it; - Who opposes using the term “apartheid” to describe the situation of the Palestinians because it is “a red flag;” - Who has spent the past several decades insisting that Israel is supported by the US because it is a “strategic asset” and “cop on the beat” for the US in the Middle East, yet no Israeli soldier has ever shed a drop of blood for US interests; - Who never speaks about AIPAC, unless asked, at which point he minimizes its power; - Who never mentions the role of Congress in shaping US Middle East policy, preferring to focus on the White House and consequently - Who never even hints that pro-Palestinian activists should campaign against liberal members of Congress who are progressive on every issue but Palestine; - Who never mentions, PNAC, JINSA, the Saban Center, the Washington Inst. for Near East Policy Foreign Policy Initiative, Foundation For the Defense of Democracies, or the American Enterprise Inst., namely all the pro-Israel think tanks that dominate the Washington political scene; - Who only this year, finally admitted that the neocons were heavily involved in pushing the Iraq war but denied they had any connection to Israel; and - Who supports BDS targeting goods manufactured in the West Bank but opposes boycotting, divesting, and sanctioning Israel, including the academic and cultural boycotts, because he believes it to be immoral and improper and that those supporting it are harming the Palestinians, including the Palestinians who advocate it. If you haven’t guessed by now who I am speaking about it is a tribute to Noam Chomsky’s ability to pull the wool over the eyes of tens of thousands of people who believe he is a champion for Palestinian rights. Yes, the person who I am referring to is none other than Noam Chomsky and everything I have written about him above I can document or have documented in two articles that I have written about him in the past which can be found online. What prompts this current post is that on Monday, I sent Chomsky a link to an important article by Israeli columnist Gideon Levy in Ha’aretz, calling for a boycott against Israel, not the settlements, but against Israel, as the only way to save Israel, with a short two sentence message: “Time to climb aboard. Noam. The train seems to be leaving the station.” Granted, having written two critical articles about him, I should have been prepared for his less than friendly response: “Happy to see that you haven’t abandoned your commitment to total irrationality and the maximum harm you can do to Palestinians. Congratulations.” At this point, I should point out that it’s Chomsky’s standard practice is to accuse his critics from the of harming the Palestinians. When I wrote him back asking whether or not he agreed with Levy, he responded: “Levy is a serious person, so I might take the trouble to explain the obvious to him – as I have to others who sent me his article. He is not dedicated to utter irrationality and maximal harm to Palestinians.” Obviously, Chomsky believes that Levy, an Israeli, is wrong to call for a boycott of Israel. Here’s the key sentence that I singled out for Chomsky and the link to Levy’s article: "As long as Israelis don’t pay a price for the occupation, or at least don’t make the connection between cause and effect, they have no incentive to bring it to an end." Chomsky has NEVER wanted Israel to pay any price, which is why I call him Mr, Damage Control. haaretz/opinion/the-israeli-patriot-s-final-refuge-boycott.premium-1.535596
Posted on: Fri, 19 Jul 2013 04:02:45 +0000
Trending Topics
Recently Viewed Topics
© 2015