Dr. Luther King said, “When people criticize Zionists they mean Jews, you are talking anti-Semitism.” The article written by Judith Butler is an illustration of new phenomena. Jews who are Anti-Zionists using Jewish ideas in order to support “the currant under dog” and today it would be “Palestinians”. Since Israel became a state in 1948 and gained power it is no longer a place which creates a notion of weakness. Israel had become for left wing Jews a huge problem that can not be solved. Taking the Palestinians side is a coping mechanism of a never ending need to help the weak against its “oppressor “. Israel had become a convenient target where Jews feeling very comfortable to criticize. As Jews it feels not only familiar ground but it is taking a part of what should be social justice or injustice as they claim to the Palestinians. Zionism became a reality and not a utopia for Jews. Many American Jews in particular had found their Zion in America and by doing that are shedding any acknowledging of what makes them Jewish according to the Bible where it stated that Israel is the land promised to the Jewish people and the land that they should live in. Whether it is the Bible and it infesiss of Israel and the all notion of Judaism” Leshanah Habah Beyerushalim” and they are turning Judaism to a universal concept where a Jewish faith is just like all other religions without any particularize denomination status .Taking a universal approach might be helping those Left wing Jews assimilate in their new defined Zion of their choice but by doing that they are taking their Judaism to a new place of redefining what Judaism is all about and taking the law, the essence of the Jewish Law and the intent to place where there is no defined religion and when one is part of the big country named America.Why would one do it? What is behind the mottos an operetta?Israel scares the left wing Jews. Being in power as a concept frightens left wing Jews that are used to fight against governments, against people in power and take sides with the weak and frightened. What shows and proves it more than all is Judith Butler article that uses distorted and at times fictional facts in order to illustrate her points. It is important to understand where is she coming from and what information she is using because she has a respectable position which she is using to reach audience and influence them with un supported one sided facts. Anyone who has inters in the truth and has a fair sense of justice should care and be aware of those facts in order to response to those who believe her and what she is stands for aka Anti Zionists.In order to understand how sever her distorted facts are we need to know that Professor Butler is a known Anti Zionists which place her already in a very odd position to write about a country she does not believe in . To take the Jews’ rights for a nation movement and country is an anti-Semite caricature. “How does one vigorously advocate” she writes in respond to Summers from Harvard University who spoke and clarified according to Judith that speaking against Israel is being Anti-Semite a point of View that I am sure was taken out of contests only because it is hard to believe that one in such a high position would think that it is wrong to criticize policies of any one and any country for that matter. “The idea that the Israeli occupation is brutal and wrong and Palestinian self-determination a necessary good”. In a letter that was publishing in a book called” Those who forget the past” was a letter by Daniel Gordis, “Take off that Mask,”p.521 Daniel writes:” You write “Daniel responses here to Jill a Rabbi from the left wing who published a dvaar Torah and is also sharing the same beliefs as Dr Judith Butler “As if Israel has a made a choice to be evil. No. you don’t say that, but that’s what you imply. You imply that we’re motivated by hate, by disregard for Arab life” As Jill so does Judith Butler who never as far as I read in researching her never visited the occupied territories but only quoting what she reads in the Arabic propaganda uses her thoughts and not facts and places them as facts . She is not coming out with solutions she is simply states how Israel should stop the occupation like Israel has inters keeping people in those places .Israel many times as in 1998 tried to sit and come to a resolution however was refused by the Arabs to settle this matter. Israel has no inters to occupy and be responsible for 800,000 Arabs who share no sympathy toward Israel and keep paying to maintain their livelihood. Israel stated many times she is willing to give back Gaza and even the territories if there could be a settlement that will not leave Israel in danger. Just think of the risk of just letting all go as happened in Gaza and the attacks increased in 150% in less than six months through the border. Many “sliks”( hidden places where you hide guns, machine guns, explosives and more) where found . How many buses number five should one endure before one’s decides to say no more?Judith Battler starts her essay with supposedly an essay against Anti Semitism made by people who criticize Israel’s action only to state in her opinion how “The destruction of homes and the killing of children in Jenin” voicing her opinion based on semi truth. Yes there were destruction of houses and some were not according to all protocols I am sure but why not state the reasons behind Israel’s actions? Why not stating how many of those houses not only were build illegally but also served as a shelter for suicide bummers and the destruction was a much easier punishment then locking thousands of people in for participating in hiding those criminals and building illegally . Why not speak of the fact that Israel told many times that she will destroy houses that serve as shelters for many months prior to any action that took place. She places those accusations cleverly in-between using language and the use of language to distribute her hate messages toward Israel and her politic point of view. It is one thing to critique Israel and another to start an article with what is Anti Semitism as a response to what she calls speech from summers from Harvard. In-between the lines of her interpretation of what Anti Semitism are she is criticizing Israel actions.Another points Judith is bringing in her article that she is” emotionally invested in the state of Israel”, one would wander what does she mean if in the next paragraph she is stating that she signed a petition that included 3700 American Jews where it was “ not nearly strong enough “ opposing Israeli occupation”, Judith was not please since it did not state to” call for the end of Zionism, or the reallocation of arable land, for rethinking the Jewish right of return or for the fair distribution of water and medicine to Palestinians” Not a word explaining Israeli side. Not a single attempt to understand what it means to rethink Jewish right of return which basically means a majority of Arab population that I against the Idea of an Jewish state. Not a word of many attempts to distribute money, medicine and was stolen by the head of the Palestinians as well as Yassar Arafat that millions of dollars were discovered in his bank account. Money that was supposes to go to the Palestinians. Not even a single word understanding the Israeli dilemma. In the name of democracy one should understand two sides and at least state them or voice their true opinions if one truly seeks “a public space in which such issues might be thoughtfully debated” and she continuing “to prevent that space being define by certain kinds of exclusion and censorship” and what exactly is Dr Judith is doing if not censors facts by not dealing with two sides and giving a voice to what Israel is saying? Or the purpose of the article; It is not to “Reframing Anti-Semitism” it is attacking Zionism hiding between analyzing what is Anti –Semitism.It is one thing to criticize Israel and bringing proves and trying to solve a problem and another to quote semi truth and hide true meaning in the name of research. Dr Judith Buttler is using free speech in the name of fairness and asking not to be judged as an Anti-Semite simply because she does not accept Israel as the land of the Jews. She might not be Anti-Semite if Israel was not existed as her plans are but she is certainly is according to her self defined title as “Anti-Zionists”If one takes right of a country to exists and defends it self and shares options as a member of Berkeley Faculty than it becomes an Issue that should be only defined as dangerous.Using her influence to force her audience to be a part of the Arab propaganda and demeaning Israel right to defend herself without bringing solutions to the problems is not only not an “open debate” it is a one sided monologue and by doing that she is actually contradicting her own request . There is no room for Anti-Zionists or any Anti Semite articles to be published under the university sponsorship. The Palestinian idea of a state is not rejected by Israel .The United nation solution was accepted by Israel and rejected by the Palestinians who wrote on their flag the destruction of Israel. It is not about criticizing Israel policy it is about criticizing Israel existence that we are fighting against when we debate Anti-Zionists. |