"Jewish Voice for Peace has chosen not to work with you because our central tenet is opposition to racism in all its forms, and you have chosen repeatedly to associate yourself with people who advocate for racism.
You have been a repeat guest of white supremacist Clay Douglas on his hate radio show, the Free American. Clay Douglas is concerned primarily with the survival of the White race and sees malign Jewish influence everywhere. His racist, anti-Jewish, and anti-gay rhetoric can be found across the front pages of his multiple websites."
I missed this whole thread. I'd better quit working.
I've been following Alison Weir's work since my father died in 2004--she wrote condolences and told me he had been a strong supporter for a long time. I have never seen anything that reeks of anti-semitism in her work. I had not read the story about purloined body parts but I have read about that elsewhere and do not doubt it happened, though why anyone would want an organ that wasn't fresh, I do not understand. Still, the Israelis have been peculiarly focused on re-visiting hospitals they've already destroyed. And eager to kill patients who would die eventually without care anyway. it is odd.
I read some of the JVC stuff and other links above. It sounds to me as though the JVC are trying to put the spotlight on their victiomhood and, frankly, I'm sick of that dynamic. Stop making this all about your friggin' FEELINGS. If you really care about Palestine, how about keeping your eyes on the people who really matter in this issue? (Hint: It's not American Jews who want to be viewed as liberal and non-racist.)
And, if I might, let me add the elephant in the room:
ARABS ARE BY DEFINITION SEMITES WHICH MOST AMERICAN JEWS ARE NOT. Arabs are the recipients of anti-Semitism to such a high degree that they're being slaughtered every day in multiple countries. GET OVER YOURSELVES. And if this makes no sense to you, a Semite is someone whose mother tongue is a Semitic language which does NOT characterize most American Jews.
You are not the central figures in this "war". I understand it is not a fun time to be a person who identifies at "Jewish" (though what that means varies widely), but this is not about you.
The reason Palestinians are being murdered and their history destroyed is that Israelis (and many Westerners) do not consider them human.
Weir's book is small and interesting to me because it is the work of someone who came to this issue all on her own at a time when most of the U.S. was busy spreading anti-Semitic memes about Arabs and Muslims. She's kept at it for several decades (that I know about). And she recognized that educating Americans was of utmost importance. I agree and this is why I support her. If you don't like that fact, tough shit.
So if you are really an ally of Palestine, stop making it about yourself and focus on the people who are being exterminated. Shut up about anti-Semitism. The term has been so trashed by Zionist propaganda it's next to meaningless anyway. You don't like negative memes about Jews? You should try being a person of color.
Everyone has something to contribute in this fight. Stop trying to minimize Weir's impact. She's been so steadfast. I would have quit in exhaustion and depression long before now.
This anti-Semitism business is another weapon in Israel's tool-kit. Just stop it.
And her book is worth the paper is written on. American Jews seem to think they are the experts on Israel. You're not. For decades your families sent money to that criminal state and forced the rest of us to support it. I think American Jess have a lot to answer for.
nosey-parker: I'm not sure who your comment addresses (and for what purpose). I listed a few examples (by famous, reputable & credible people & organizations) on the topic. If you have problems with the content, I suggest you take it up with the authors/source of the content (and not the messenger).
Another problem with your comment is that you are making strawman arguments that are unrelated to what I wrote. (re: I personally have not made any arguments for or aginst anti-semitist - in fact, I don't even mention the word once). So I'm not sure what inferences you are making. Maybe you are having an argument with yourself about something you assume from the comment?
Also, I'm not sure on what basis you make the assumptions you do about me.
Examples:
(1)"You should try being a person of color" ? What makes you think I am or am not?
(2) "I understand it is not a fun time to be a person who identifies at "Jewish" (though what that means varies widely), but this is not about you." ? What makes you think I am Jewish?
(3) What makes you think "I" said anything about anti-semitism? (or that this discussion was about anti-semitism)?
Again, none of the opinions in my original comment are mine. So go take up the discussion with them if you are rattled/triggered with the arguments presented by them. (and maybe re-read by original comment - maybe that will help).
Aaargh! I was not addressing you. I was responding to some of the many links people posted in trying to discredit Alison Weir. I had no idea all this was going on. Not you. Please do not think that I was responding to you. Mostly I'm responding to the JVC and the coalition that has been attacking her. Not you at all. This is one of the problems with the way Substacks sets up their comments section. Sorry!
My post still stands. All of it. But it is not directed at you.
Jewish Voice for Peace wrote to Alison Weir - 'In the course of your appearance with Clay Douglas on 8/25/2010, you were silent when Douglas invoked the Protocols of the Elders of Zion'. I read the Protocols of Zion. I find it interesting that the Jewish Community does not negate them. These protocols are not only chillingly reflective of the brutal world we see unfolding, to not 'call them out', shows bias, but to criticize people who do, borders on complicity of their savage principles.
>>"I read the Protocols of Zion....These protocols are not only chillingly reflective of the brutal world we see unfolding..."
This simple statement you make is more indicative of your thought process and mindset than anything else you have said. There is nothing I could say, no amount of reason, rationality, or logic - that would have an impact on you or get you to question your assumptions and assertions on the beliefs that you hold.
I guess you didn't read (or understand) my comment, so let me paraphrase:
There's nothing I could say "TO YOU" that would get you to examine your bias.
But there are other readers in this community that will take what they will from refutations of your logic and bias. (Unless of course you prefer people accept your opinions unquestioningly and don't wish for them to challenge you or call you out on them).
You know, in a perfect world Chang, we'd all agree. But adults can agree to not agree. When the labels get trotted out.. 'illogic'.. 'bias'.. etc, it is -> news flash - a vestage of your opinion. Which you are welcome to. As I am mine. Withdraw your attack and be peaceful.
Since when are "illogical" and "bias" labels? They are examples of tools for critical thinking. Being aware of biases, fallacies, heuristics, etc. is important - regardless of the subject matter being discussed. Also, logic is another important component of rational analysis and an essential component of dialectical discussions and debates. To consider words like "illogical" or "bias" as labels or attacks confounds me.
>>"adults can agree to not agree"?
Yes, and that is precisely what I/we are doing are we not? We are agreeing to disagree and putting forth our arguments. Did you perceive the comment as something else? As I mentioned before - I can't convince you of anything even if I tried - hence I am not trying to convince you of anything. I am simply calling to attention the flaws that I observe in your arguments.
>>"Withdraw your attack and be peaceful."
What in the world made you feel anything I said was an attack on you? It was a refutation of your opinions, assumptions, assertations and modes of thinking.
VJCBingham -> If you took anything that I said as an attack on you, then I sincerely apologize. I actually respect your polite response, and I agree with you on "being peaceful". So again, even though I don't understand how I seem to have offended you, I do apologize (as I believe from our conversation that your heart is in the right place - and that is more important than any differences of opinion we may have).
You remind me of a short debate I had with a local 'friend'. The friendship didn't last the debate however, since I was presenting evidence and seeking answers that never came. I was labeled instead.. 'deceived'. As soon as the labels come out, you know the discussion is over.
Let's leave aside that the leaps of logic, critical thinking errors, and weak referential integrity of the relationships you question (might I add conspiratorially) doesn't provide a shred of evidence to backup anything you say (other than your opinions).
A common strategy for people to attack others is:
(1) Cast doubt on any source that disagrees with your point of view using the classic "Who funds x,y,z"? Valid questions. But before such questions are asked (and this can be asked of all/any groups or individuals - even the ones you agree with), one needs to do due dilligence of the content. In this example, you seem eager to cast doubt on "Arab America" by using the familiar question "Who funds this?" regardless of any research as to the integrity OR accuracy of the material produced by the group. So why should anyone fall for your classic attempts at deflection?
This is just one example of the strategies that deniers use when they don't have facts or evidence to back up their claims. So they have a proclivity to weave these threads by "attempting to plant seeds of doubt" in an effort to abrogate critical thinking.
I could go on with a detailed analysis of the errors in your comment, but IMO it is not worth the time - as you have already demonstrated your stance and bias beyond any shadow of a doubt.
(PS: many people use the same strategies you use - including Israel. How many times has Israel attempted to cast doubt and villify/discredit/defame a source using the "who funds" argument? How many times have Israel tried to disrepute and stigmatize sources that reveal evidence that goes against their narrative? How often does Israel use the same tactic that you do (of giving significance to relationships that might not have any significance or bearing on the situation at all? (re:"executive director Rebecca Vilkomerson's husband was/is still working for Checkpoint, an "israeli" cyber security firm that makes monitoring software.")
Your comment, unfortunately, reeks of the same strategies that Israel uses to rebutt any facts/evidence that go against its narrative and interests.
Really Ernesto, is that what you think of Jews and Jewry?
And I'm the one with a problem?
Thank you for clarifying your position.
Even the Palestinians don't hate Jews the way you do. They hate "Israeli Zionists", "American Zionists", and any other Zionists out there. They also hate settler-colonialism and being oppressed (regardless of if Jews or some other ethnic group are doing the oppressing). If you doubt that, I suggest you work on getting your information from credible sources with high integrity.
I am not sure what to make of Alison Weir or her book (I have not read it, so I'm unable to take sides or make a judgement).
What I found surprising are some people/organizations that I respect had some opposing views to "Alison Weir":
(1) Max Blumenthal (Grayzone) -> Tweet: "It's pretty clear Alison Weir's email is a desperate ploy to sell a book that's not worth the pulp it's printed" (https://twitter.com/MaxBlumenthal/status/639161659219701760)
(2) Jewish Voice for Peace (JVP) - Jewish Voice for Peace Statement on Our Relationship with Alison Weir (https://www.jewishvoiceforpeace.org/2015/06/15/jewish-voice-for-peace-statement-on-our-relationship-with-alison-weir/)
(3) JVP - Letter to Alison Weir (https://www.jewishvoiceforpeace.org/2015/06/14/letter-to-alison-weir/)
"Jewish Voice for Peace has chosen not to work with you because our central tenet is opposition to racism in all its forms, and you have chosen repeatedly to associate yourself with people who advocate for racism.
You have been a repeat guest of white supremacist Clay Douglas on his hate radio show, the Free American. Clay Douglas is concerned primarily with the survival of the White race and sees malign Jewish influence everywhere. His racist, anti-Jewish, and anti-gay rhetoric can be found across the front pages of his multiple websites."
(4) Arab America -> US Campaign to End the Israeli Occupation : Statement on Complaint Filed Regarding Alison Weir and If Americans Knew (https://www.arabamerica.com/us-campaign-to-end-the-israeli-occupation-statement-on-complaint-filed-regarding-alison-weir-and-if-americans-knew/)
(5) Mondoweiss Breaks Silence Over The Alison Weir/JVP Controversy – Or Does It? (https://platosguns.com/2015/08/13/mondoweiss-breaks-silence-over-the-alison-weirjvp-controversy-or-do-they/)
For what it's worth, I do find Alison Weir's work interesting and informative, and I do need to read her book(s) before casting opinions.
VJCBingham -> Thank you for the information. Definitely something worth checking out.
I missed this whole thread. I'd better quit working.
I've been following Alison Weir's work since my father died in 2004--she wrote condolences and told me he had been a strong supporter for a long time. I have never seen anything that reeks of anti-semitism in her work. I had not read the story about purloined body parts but I have read about that elsewhere and do not doubt it happened, though why anyone would want an organ that wasn't fresh, I do not understand. Still, the Israelis have been peculiarly focused on re-visiting hospitals they've already destroyed. And eager to kill patients who would die eventually without care anyway. it is odd.
I read some of the JVC stuff and other links above. It sounds to me as though the JVC are trying to put the spotlight on their victiomhood and, frankly, I'm sick of that dynamic. Stop making this all about your friggin' FEELINGS. If you really care about Palestine, how about keeping your eyes on the people who really matter in this issue? (Hint: It's not American Jews who want to be viewed as liberal and non-racist.)
And, if I might, let me add the elephant in the room:
ARABS ARE BY DEFINITION SEMITES WHICH MOST AMERICAN JEWS ARE NOT. Arabs are the recipients of anti-Semitism to such a high degree that they're being slaughtered every day in multiple countries. GET OVER YOURSELVES. And if this makes no sense to you, a Semite is someone whose mother tongue is a Semitic language which does NOT characterize most American Jews.
You are not the central figures in this "war". I understand it is not a fun time to be a person who identifies at "Jewish" (though what that means varies widely), but this is not about you.
The reason Palestinians are being murdered and their history destroyed is that Israelis (and many Westerners) do not consider them human.
Weir's book is small and interesting to me because it is the work of someone who came to this issue all on her own at a time when most of the U.S. was busy spreading anti-Semitic memes about Arabs and Muslims. She's kept at it for several decades (that I know about). And she recognized that educating Americans was of utmost importance. I agree and this is why I support her. If you don't like that fact, tough shit.
So if you are really an ally of Palestine, stop making it about yourself and focus on the people who are being exterminated. Shut up about anti-Semitism. The term has been so trashed by Zionist propaganda it's next to meaningless anyway. You don't like negative memes about Jews? You should try being a person of color.
Everyone has something to contribute in this fight. Stop trying to minimize Weir's impact. She's been so steadfast. I would have quit in exhaustion and depression long before now.
This anti-Semitism business is another weapon in Israel's tool-kit. Just stop it.
And her book is worth the paper is written on. American Jews seem to think they are the experts on Israel. You're not. For decades your families sent money to that criminal state and forced the rest of us to support it. I think American Jess have a lot to answer for.
nosey-parker: I'm not sure who your comment addresses (and for what purpose). I listed a few examples (by famous, reputable & credible people & organizations) on the topic. If you have problems with the content, I suggest you take it up with the authors/source of the content (and not the messenger).
Another problem with your comment is that you are making strawman arguments that are unrelated to what I wrote. (re: I personally have not made any arguments for or aginst anti-semitist - in fact, I don't even mention the word once). So I'm not sure what inferences you are making. Maybe you are having an argument with yourself about something you assume from the comment?
Also, I'm not sure on what basis you make the assumptions you do about me.
Examples:
(1)"You should try being a person of color" ? What makes you think I am or am not?
(2) "I understand it is not a fun time to be a person who identifies at "Jewish" (though what that means varies widely), but this is not about you." ? What makes you think I am Jewish?
(3) What makes you think "I" said anything about anti-semitism? (or that this discussion was about anti-semitism)?
Again, none of the opinions in my original comment are mine. So go take up the discussion with them if you are rattled/triggered with the arguments presented by them. (and maybe re-read by original comment - maybe that will help).
Aaargh! I was not addressing you. I was responding to some of the many links people posted in trying to discredit Alison Weir. I had no idea all this was going on. Not you. Please do not think that I was responding to you. Mostly I'm responding to the JVC and the coalition that has been attacking her. Not you at all. This is one of the problems with the way Substacks sets up their comments section. Sorry!
My post still stands. All of it. But it is not directed at you.
Jewish Voice for Peace wrote to Alison Weir - 'In the course of your appearance with Clay Douglas on 8/25/2010, you were silent when Douglas invoked the Protocols of the Elders of Zion'. I read the Protocols of Zion. I find it interesting that the Jewish Community does not negate them. These protocols are not only chillingly reflective of the brutal world we see unfolding, to not 'call them out', shows bias, but to criticize people who do, borders on complicity of their savage principles.
>>"I read the Protocols of Zion....These protocols are not only chillingly reflective of the brutal world we see unfolding..."
This simple statement you make is more indicative of your thought process and mindset than anything else you have said. There is nothing I could say, no amount of reason, rationality, or logic - that would have an impact on you or get you to question your assumptions and assertions on the beliefs that you hold.
"There is nothing I could say,.." Then don't.
I guess you didn't read (or understand) my comment, so let me paraphrase:
There's nothing I could say "TO YOU" that would get you to examine your bias.
But there are other readers in this community that will take what they will from refutations of your logic and bias. (Unless of course you prefer people accept your opinions unquestioningly and don't wish for them to challenge you or call you out on them).
You know, in a perfect world Chang, we'd all agree. But adults can agree to not agree. When the labels get trotted out.. 'illogic'.. 'bias'.. etc, it is -> news flash - a vestage of your opinion. Which you are welcome to. As I am mine. Withdraw your attack and be peaceful.
Since when are "illogical" and "bias" labels? They are examples of tools for critical thinking. Being aware of biases, fallacies, heuristics, etc. is important - regardless of the subject matter being discussed. Also, logic is another important component of rational analysis and an essential component of dialectical discussions and debates. To consider words like "illogical" or "bias" as labels or attacks confounds me.
>>"adults can agree to not agree"?
Yes, and that is precisely what I/we are doing are we not? We are agreeing to disagree and putting forth our arguments. Did you perceive the comment as something else? As I mentioned before - I can't convince you of anything even if I tried - hence I am not trying to convince you of anything. I am simply calling to attention the flaws that I observe in your arguments.
>>"Withdraw your attack and be peaceful."
What in the world made you feel anything I said was an attack on you? It was a refutation of your opinions, assumptions, assertations and modes of thinking.
VJCBingham -> If you took anything that I said as an attack on you, then I sincerely apologize. I actually respect your polite response, and I agree with you on "being peaceful". So again, even though I don't understand how I seem to have offended you, I do apologize (as I believe from our conversation that your heart is in the right place - and that is more important than any differences of opinion we may have).
Thank you for the important commentary on this point.
You remind me of a short debate I had with a local 'friend'. The friendship didn't last the debate however, since I was presenting evidence and seeking answers that never came. I was labeled instead.. 'deceived'. As soon as the labels come out, you know the discussion is over.
That has been my observation.
Let's leave aside that the leaps of logic, critical thinking errors, and weak referential integrity of the relationships you question (might I add conspiratorially) doesn't provide a shred of evidence to backup anything you say (other than your opinions).
A common strategy for people to attack others is:
(1) Cast doubt on any source that disagrees with your point of view using the classic "Who funds x,y,z"? Valid questions. But before such questions are asked (and this can be asked of all/any groups or individuals - even the ones you agree with), one needs to do due dilligence of the content. In this example, you seem eager to cast doubt on "Arab America" by using the familiar question "Who funds this?" regardless of any research as to the integrity OR accuracy of the material produced by the group. So why should anyone fall for your classic attempts at deflection?
This is just one example of the strategies that deniers use when they don't have facts or evidence to back up their claims. So they have a proclivity to weave these threads by "attempting to plant seeds of doubt" in an effort to abrogate critical thinking.
I could go on with a detailed analysis of the errors in your comment, but IMO it is not worth the time - as you have already demonstrated your stance and bias beyond any shadow of a doubt.
(PS: many people use the same strategies you use - including Israel. How many times has Israel attempted to cast doubt and villify/discredit/defame a source using the "who funds" argument? How many times have Israel tried to disrepute and stigmatize sources that reveal evidence that goes against their narrative? How often does Israel use the same tactic that you do (of giving significance to relationships that might not have any significance or bearing on the situation at all? (re:"executive director Rebecca Vilkomerson's husband was/is still working for Checkpoint, an "israeli" cyber security firm that makes monitoring software.")
Your comment, unfortunately, reeks of the same strategies that Israel uses to rebutt any facts/evidence that go against its narrative and interests.
HaHa. Thanks Ernesto for providing me with a good laugh. I'm beginning to enjoy the subtle comedy in your responses.
>>"...the world's only racist cesspool..."
Really Ernesto, is that what you think of Jews and Jewry?
And I'm the one with a problem?
Thank you for clarifying your position.
Even the Palestinians don't hate Jews the way you do. They hate "Israeli Zionists", "American Zionists", and any other Zionists out there. They also hate settler-colonialism and being oppressed (regardless of if Jews or some other ethnic group are doing the oppressing). If you doubt that, I suggest you work on getting your information from credible sources with high integrity.