THE FURTHER CORRESPONDENCES OF MARC SUSSELMAN PART 11
16 November 2023
MS said:
I also recommend Nicholas Kristosff’s NYT editorial, “What We Get Wrong About Israel and Gaza,” much of which I agree with, but not all. He states that the tragedy of the conflict is that it is conflict between Right against Right. But there are degrees of being correct, and in this conflict I believe that there is more “right” on the side of the Israelis than on the side of the Palestinians. And Kristoff’s analysis contains the following flaw. He states, “Israel has a right to feel anxious in any case, but I suspect that the best way to ensure its security may be not to defer Palestinian aspirations but to honor them with a two-state solution. This is not just a concession to Arabs but a pragmatic acknowledgment of Israel’s own interests – and the world’s.” Good enough, I agree it would be wonderful for the Palestinians and for the Israelis if they could figure out how to achieve a two-state solution. But earlier in the editorial he states this: “But Palestinian statelessness in retrospect has not made Israel safe, and risks may increase if the Palestinian Authority collapses from corruption, ineffectiveness and lack of legitimacy.” Here lies the nub, and why Israelis are more in the right than the Palestinians. Kristoff agrees that Hamas is evil and deserves being destroyed. Yet he acknowledges that Fatah is corrupt, ineffective and illegitimate. These are the only two forms of governance which the Palestinians have had. Is it Israel’s fault that the Palestinians are unable to figure out how to govern themselves in a fair and democratic government? Under such circumstances, how is a two-state solution possible? And how long must Israel wait for them to figure it out in order to facilitate the creation of the two-state solution? In the meantime, while the Palestinians try – for 75 years now – to figure it out, Israelis are subjected to rocket attacks from Gaza and suicide bombers from the West Bank. How long must Israel tolerate the inability of the Palestinians to figure out a way to govern themselves without using brutal force to defend themselves?
It is easy enough for liberals to say what is needed is a two-state solution. Of course that is what is needed. But how, liberals, including liberal Jews, do you propose to achieve this, while Israel remains attacked on the West by Gaza, and on the East by terrorists in the West Bank? Even Mr. Kristoff does not offer a solution. Israel has tried multiple times. And each time the Palestinians’ leadership has found some reason not to sign a settlement agreement which will end hostilities. In the meantime, the liberals criticize Israel for using brutal methods to defend itself. Where the hell is your solution to the two-state dilemma?
********
MS said:
I strongly recommend reading Charles Blow’s editorial in today’s NYT, “The Question of Anti-Zionism and Antisemtism.” It is nuanced and cogent.
"https://www.nytimes.com/2023/11/15/opinion/israel-gaza-antisemitism.html?campaign_id=39&emc=edit_ty_20231116&instance_id=107859&nl=opinion-today®i_id=116606494&segment_id=150196&te=1&user_id=306c6f279e52d371ba02c31b1c20638c"
He asked a number of Palestinian supporters , “Does Israel have a right to exist.” None of them answered with a direct “yes.”
He asked a Palestinian supporter, Marc Lamont Hill, this question. He responded, “[N]o nation has the right to not be a state of all of its citizens” or to “create a hierarchy along ethnic, racial, gender, religious lines.” Even assuming this is the case of Israel West of the Green line (and many Israelis would dispute this, since many Israeli citizens West of the Green line are Palestinian), is this standard met by any nation on Earth? Do the Saudis treat all of its citizens equally? Does France, Great Britain, Italy, yes, and even Sweden and Denmark? Does the U.S.? So why should Israel be condemned for not meeting a standard that no other country meets?
To the question, “Does anti-Zionism equal anti-Semitism,” Jonathan Greenblatt, the President of ADL stated that answering “no” to this question would be like saying in 1963, “I’m against the civil rights movement, but I’m also against racism.” Why? Because whatever form of Zionism one supports, it means that the Jewish people have a right to a country in which they are a majority and have the right to self-determination, and that country is to be located in Palestine.” If one says that, no, the Jewish people do not have such a right, how can that not equate to anti-Semitism? The French have that right, where the majority of the people are Catholic. The Saudi Arabians have that right, where the majority of the people are Muslim. The Indians have that right, where the majority if the people are Hindus. Why would the Jews not have that right?
********
MS said:
I am finding it exhausting to have to respond to the multiple specious comments by Zimmerman and s. wallenstein, while I have pressing legal work to do for my clients. Nonetheless, Zimmerman, you repeatedly display your sophistry and intellectual dishonesty. Regarding the fact that France is not “officially” a Catholic country, and that India is not “officially” a Hindu country, Judaism, and being Jewish is not just about a religion. Being Jewish is largely about religion, but it is also about a culture and an ethnicity, which you ignore. You yourself, although an atheist, and may not have attended services in a synagogue or a temple for years, perhaps decades, apparently still regard yourself as being Jewish, It is certainly not due to your piety. So, saying that Jews deserve a state of their own is not just a statement that religious Jews deserve a state of their own. Even non-religious Jews have been persecuted, tortured, and murdered throughout the centuries. The Nazis did not care how religious their victims were. So, to say that Jews are entitled to have a country of their own, includes people who only identify as Jewish culturally and/or by ethnicity. There is no question that the majority population of France is Catholic, and that the majority population of India is Hindu. No one would say that the Catholics of France are not entitled to their own country because Catholicism is a religion, or the same for the Hindus of India. Therefore, your point that France is not “officially” Catholic, and that India is not “officially” Hindu is irrelevant, specious, and frankly, stupid. And I have not used any profanity, or ad hominem attacks to rebut your nonsense, but I am strongly tempted to do so.
s. wallerstein, you state that Israel has a right to be a Jewish state “as long as they respect the human rights of all who live within their territory.” So, according to you, since Israel purportedly does not respect the human rights of all who live within their territory, they have abdicated the right to have a state of their own? Moreover, I question you claim that the Israeli government does not respect the rights of all people who live within its territory. Do you claim that Palestinian Israelis living West of the Green line do not have the same rights as Jewish Israelis? If you do, you do not know what you are talking about. Are there instances in which individual Israelis discriminate against Palestinians? Of course. Just as there are instances in which individual Americans discriminate against African-Americans. That does not make discrimination the de jure policy of the U.S. government.
Regarding the West Bank, Israel has sought for decades to finalize a two-state solution that would provide the Palestinian with their own sovereignty. Each attempt has failed. You would claim, of course, that this has been because the Israelis have not bargained in good faith. Again, you would not know what you are talking about. The main issue which has scuttled each attempt was the refusal of the Palestinians to forsake their demand for a right of return of all the Palestinians who fled their homes in 1948 (not, by the way, exclusively due to alleged Israeli provocation, but in large part due to exhortations by the invading Arab nations, with a guarantee that they would be allowed to return once the Jews were “driven into the sea), which would include the three generations of children, grand-children, and great grand-children, which would result in the nullification of Israel as a Jewish state. This is an issue which is not open for discussion for the Israelis, and rightfully so. If the Palestinians agreed to a two-state solution which did not include a right of return, they would have their own state in which the so-called refugees could start their new lives – like the millions of Jewish refugees who survived the Holocaust and started new lives in the U.S., Israel, South Africa, Argentina, …What is your answer to the same question which I asked regarding Kristoff’s editorial – what is your solution to solving the two-state logjam, or are you all just talk, like so many liberal Jews?
Finally, your statement “they have absolutely no right to carry out ethnic cleansing in Gaza” would be true, if that is what they are doing. And your implication that they are in fact engaged in ethnic cleansing in Gaza is false, and defamatorily so. You, of course, are referring to the pervasive bombing raids of Northern Gaza being conducted by Israel, which have resulted in the deaths of thousands of Palestinian civilians. But Israel has demonstrated that Hamas has used hospitals, schools, and private residences in which to conceal their military operations - notwithstanding Zimmerman’s false comment on Wolff’s blog that the IDF has offered no evidence of such infiltration, when the IDF displayed on public television caches of weapons being hidden in the Al-Shifa hospital. Ethnic cleansing, when Israel has repeatedly warned Palestinians in North Gaza to relocate to the South? Does this result in displacement, of course. But does displacement which will save lives, rather in their deaths, constitute ethnic cleansing? The degree of linguistic distortions which you and other liberals are engaging in would boggle George Orwell, whom you supposedly admire.
Now I have more important things to turn to, like preventing a client from being unlawfully evicted from her apartment; protecting the free speech rights of gays living in Hamtramck, Michigan; protecting Michigan citizens from having their due process rights violated under the Michigan Court of Claims Act; protecting my Jewish clients from being forced to pay a bunch of anti-Semitic, Holocaust denying protesters attorney fees in the amount of $158,000 because they filed a supposedly “frivolous” lawsuit seeking protection from signs which stated such things as “Jewish Power Corrupts”; “Resist Jewish Power”; “No More Holocaust Movies” posted every Saturday morning in front of their synagogue as they entered the synagogue in order to exercise their First Amendment right of freedom of religion.
********
MS said:
I agree with Jake Tapper’s criticism of the extremists in Netanyahu’s Cabinet. Israel has to put a stop to the atrocities being committed by the zealot settlers against Palestinians living in the West Bank. If I were in the government, I would have them arrested and prosecuted.
"https://www.cnn.com/videos/world/2023/11/15/the-lead-israeli-cabinet-extreme-speech-jake-tapper-live.cnn"
********
MS said:
aaall says:
“Given the cruelty and mendacity of Israel”
This is as anti-Semitic a statement as I have seen on Wolff’s blog.
********
17 November 2023
MS said:
"https://www.cnn.com/videos/world/2023/11/16/sexual-violence-israeli-women-hamas-attack-tapper-pkg-lead-vpx.cnn"
And still the PLO will not condemn Hamas. Palestinians in the West Bank cheer and applaud what Hamas did. Palestinians in Gaza cheered and applauded what Hamas did. I have not seen any video of a single Palestinian, as they march South at Israel’s direction, condemn Hamas. People, even commenters on Wolff’s blog, assert that the Hamas massacre was caused by Israeli oppression.
And so, of course, it is Israel which is cruel; and it is Israel which is mendacious. And people like Zimmerman and s. wallerstein and aaall claim that such comments are not anti-Semitic. Why? Because it is Israel’s fault that there has not been a two-state solution, while Fatah continues to rule the West Bank without elections, and steals money from the Palestinian people. And that is Israel’s fault, of course.
********
MS said:
I have just seen a report on CNN of a father grieving for his son who was shot as they were marching South, holding a white flag. There was video of other Palestinians shot, as they march South. Israel’s critics will jump to the conclusion that it was Israeli snipers who shot them. That may be true. But it may not. Without any confirmation, it is just as likely that Hamas terrorists shot them, to prevent others from leaving northern Gaza, to make the world think that the cruel, mendacious Israelis are engaging in crimes against humanity.
********
MS said:
I just read the interview in the Atlantic that aaall linked to.
Ms. Weiss’s views are despicable and repugnant. Her vision of an Israel which stretches from the Euprathes to the Nile parallels the Iranian vision for a new Caliphate and is equally deplorable. Most Israelis, and certainly most Diaspora Jews, do not agree with her vision – and it will not be realized. Yitzhak Rabin was prepared to forcibly remove the settlers from most of the West Bank settlements, which is why he was assassinated by a Jewish zealot. Forced removal will be necessary to establish the two-state solution. By the same token, the Palestinians will have to abandon their demand for a right of return. Without both concessions, there will never be a sovereign Palestinian state.
********
MS said:
Zimmerman, it is quite amazing how you can distort history in order to accommodate your left-wing views. Yes, Arabs and Muslims from all over the world would have a right of return to the new Palestinian state which is created once the two-state solution is realized. Likewise, Jews in the Diaspora have a right to return to the Israeli state which will be created West of the Green line. The Palestinians’ right of return would not include returning to the homes they fled in 1948 (mostly at the urging of the invading Arab nations). Similarly, the Jewish right of return would not include returning to Samaria and Judea East of the Green line. And to hell with Ms. Weiss. What is unfair in that?
********
Michael said:
How do we know if anyone is truly antisemitic? What kind of method can we use in finding this out? All one really has to do is exchange the players in the current scenario.
Ask an American protester the following. If the Palestinians of northern Gaza were raided by Israeli terrorists & subjected to unspeakable crimes, in the exact same way that Israelies near Gaza were, and if a Palestinian Army, from Gaza, invaded & bombed Israel in retaliation, in the exact same way that Israel has done to the Palestinian terrorists (& civilians) in Gaza, would such American protesters be protesting equally against the Palestinian authorities & people of Palestine, in the exact same way as they are doing now, against the Jews & the nation of Israel? Well if they don't want to answer the question, or if they want to change the subject, or if they argue that Israel is always evil, then they are antisemitic. Or maybe I'm wrong?
********
MS said:
Of course, blame the Israelis, blame the Jews, even though it is all supposition.
If Hamas is willing to endanger the lives of Palestinians by concealing their weapons and military command structure under hospitals, schools, and residences, why would you assume that they would not discourage Palestinains from evacuating to the South. You and Zimmerman are always willing to jump to the conclusion that it is the Israelis who are the most likely culprits. You both disgust me.
********
MS said:
"https://www.cnn.com/2023/11/17/opinions/israel-approach-palestinian-authority-west-bank-ibish/index.html#:~:text=For%20almost%2020%20years%2C%20Israel's,enclaves%20in%20the%20West"
Hussein Ibish’s analysis is measured, objective and makes sense, unlike the crap which appears on Wolff’s blog.
********
MS said:
No Michael, you are not wrong. You have it exactly correct. There is a worldwide double standard at play, and people like wallerstein and Zimmerman buy into it, in order to show how fair-minded, good-hearted Jews they are.
********
19 November 2023
MS said:
Eric, as usual, offers erroneous and distorted information regarding the explosions at the Al-Ahli hospital in Gaza. The report he refers to is dated 11/14/23 and relates to events which occurred after the IDF forces entered Gaza to eliminate Hamas from the city proper. He implies that the report is about the explosion which occurred on 10/17/23 in the courtyard of the hospital, which Hamas attributed to Israel, but which Israel maintains the explosion was caused by a misfired Palestinian rocket.
The analyses of the 10/17/23 incident confirm that Israel was correct, as confirmed by NYT reports analyzing the data relating to the 10/17 incident. You will note that the reporters of the 11/14 report cited by Eric are not the same reporters who provide a detailed analysis of the 10/17 explosioin.
Hamas Fails to Make Case That Israel Struck Hospital, 10/22/23
"https://www.nytimes.com/2023/10/22/world/middleeast/israel-gaza-hospital-evidence.html#:~:text=A%20senior%20Hamas%20official%20says,by%20a%20misfired%20Palestinian%20rocket"
A Close Look at Some Key Evidence in the Gaza Hospital Blast, 10/31/23
"https://www.nytimes.com/2023/10/18/world/middleeast/gaza-hospital-israel-hamas-explained.html"
Eric’s use of the word “genocide” to describe what the IDF is doing in Gaza is Orwellian. A genocide is the deliberate, intentional targeting a group of people for annihilation based on their race, ethnicity, or religion. Israel’s war on Hamas is a way to destroy Hamas. It is not an intentional campaign to annihilate the Palestinian people, notwithstanding the unintended (Yes, UNINTENDED) deaths of Palestinian civilians. People like Eric trade in misinformation and distortion of the English language in order to condemn Israel, which, as far as I am concerned, constitutes anti-Semitism. Go ahead Zimmerman and s. wallerstein, denounce me as being a Zionist bigot.
********
MS said:
Yeah, right, some of my best friends are Jewish. He only is respectful to Woff, Chomksy and Finkelstein because they have Ph.D.'s from Ivy League universities and outrank him.
His anti-Semticims is demonstrated by his persistent distortion of facts and language, always to make Israel and Jews - other than Wolff, Chomsky and Finkelstien - look bad in comparison with Palestinians and Muslims.
And NO, Israel is not engaging in ethnic cleansing. It is recommending that Gazans move South in order to save their lives when in its final stages of destroying Hamas. Of course you will point out that even Gazan marching South have been killed. Do you know yet who the snipers were who shot them as they waved the truce flag?
********
MS said:
I am leaving to attend a lecture by the history professor who teaches the course at the University of Michigan on the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. He is Jewish, but I know from personal experience is not biased in favor of Israel, or against the Palestinains - a propostition which I expect you and Zimmerman to reject as impossible. i will respond to your last comment when I get back (time permitting).
********
The End.