yayyyyyy God

[Schwa.]

600th post!! that is all.

[Kanada Kev]

Just wait until the 666th

[phishtaper]

dibs

[Birdy]

I found it interesting last night reading all of what was being said and watching how the discussion went so quickly to accusations of anti-semitism (both in this thread and in the food policy thread) and thought that was a pretty sad reflection.

I think Desmond Tutu is one of the greatest men that's lived on the planet earth in the last century, and thought his book 'No Future without Forgiveness' pretty awesome with a powerful message.

He brings up some good points here that should be considered, because ultimately today (many would agree) it is very hard to be critical of Israel (as I don't think anyone last night was even remotely being critical of Israel, but the very mention of the subject brought out all the voices) without falling into the trap the conversation last night brought about:

South African Nobel Peace laureate Archbishop Desmond Tutu on Thursday accused the West of complicity in Palestinian suffering by its silence, suggesting it did not want to criticize Israel because of the Holocaust.

Tutu spoke after delivering a report to the United Nations about Israel's deadly shelling of the town of Beit Hanun in Gaza in November 2006, which he said may constitute a war crime.

He criticized the international community for failing to speak out against the suffering in Gaza, home to 1.5 million Palestinians, under an Israeli blockade.

Advertisement

"This silence begets complicity," he told the UN Human Rights Council.

Tutu later told a news conference: "I think the West, quite rightly, is feeling contrite, penitent, for its awful connivance with the Holocaust."

"The penance is being paid by the Palestinians. I just hope again that ordinary citizens in the West will wake up and say 'we refuse to be part of this'," he said.

The Geneva-based Human Rights Council on Thursday debated the report on his fact-finding mission conducted last May, which called for an independent investigation into the Israeli strike that killed 19 Palestinians, all but one from the same family.

The Israeli military, after carrying out its own investigation, said in February that it had directed artillery fire against the Beit Hanun area on Nov. 8 2006, on the basis of intelligence that militants were planning rocket attacks.

Israeli ambassador Aharon Leshno Yaar told the Council on Thursday: "A thorough internal investigation was conducted and the results of this investigation shared with the United Nations. Nothing can be gained by rehashing this topic now."

But Tutu, who won the 1985 Nobel Peace Prize for his non-violent struggle against apartheid in his homeland, said his mission never had access to the internal Israeli report.

It was regrettable that Israel had not cooperated with his team, although it admitted responsibility for the strike.

"No verifiable explanation has been offered, no independent impartial and transparent investigation has been held, no one has been held to account," Tutu said.

In talks with senior Hamas officials, Tutu said he demanded an end to the firing of rockets into Israel, saying Hamas has an obligation to respect international humanitarian law.

"Families living in Sderot have the right to live without the fear of rockets, however crude, dropping from the sky," he said.

Israel and the West tightened restrictions last year on the Gaza Strip in an attempt to isolate Hamas after its fighters seized the territory. The Islamist group opposed Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas' peace talks with Israel.

Palestinian ambassador Mohammad Abu-Koash said Tutu's report should be brought to the attention of both the International Court of Justice and the International Criminal Court.

"The Israeli shelling of civilians in Beit Hanun while asleep in their homes and targeting of those fleeing is a war crime and its perpetrators must be brought before international justice," he said in a speech.

Nobel Laureate Desmond Tutu Banned From Campus Over Israel Criticism

by Cecilie Surasky, Jewish Voice for Peace

www.alternet.org, October 3, 2007

Rumors have been circulating for some time that Archbishop Desmond Tutu was banned by the University of St Thomas in Minnesota because of statements he made that some consider anti-Semitic. Now it's official: winning the Nobel Peace Prize doesn't protect you from charges of anti-Semitism if you criticize Israeli human rights practices. Neither, apparently, does being one of the most compelling voices for social justice in the world today, or even getting an honorary degree from and giving the commencement address at Brandeis.

Minneapolis/St.Paul's City Pages just reported that members of the St Thomas Justice and Peace Studies program were thrilled when Bishop Tutu agreed to speak at the University" but administrators did a scientific survey of the Jews of Minneapolis, which included querying exactly one spokesperson for Minnesota's Jewish Community Relations Council and several rabbis who taught in a University program" and concluded that Tutu is bad for the Jews and should therefore be barred from campus.

in a move that still has faculty members shaking their heads in disbelief, St. Thomas administrators--concerned that Tutu's appearance might offend local Jews--told organizers that a visit from the archbishop was out of the question.

"We had heard some things he said that some people judged to be anti-Semitic and against Israeli policy," says Doug Hennes, St. Thomas's vice president for university and government relations. "We're not saying he's anti-Semitic. But he's compared the state of Israel to Hitler and our feeling was that making moral equivalencies like that are hurtful to some members of the Jewish community."

St. Thomas officials made this inference after Hennes talked to Julie Swiler, a spokeswoman for the Jewish Community Relations Council of Minnesota and the Dakotas. "I told him that I'd run across some statements that were of concern to me," says Swiler. "In a 2002 speech in Boston, he made some comments that were especially hurtful."

Just to send the message home, Swiler says:

"I think there's a consensus in the Jewish community that his words were offensive."

To be clear here, Swiler and the other rabbis have the right to say whatever they think, though representing those opinions, as Swiler does, as a Jewish consensus, is laughable.

Ultimately, groups like Minnesota's JCRC, the right wing fringe group Zionist Organization of America, and the increasingly embarrassing Anti-Defamation League, who have all attacked Tutu for his criticism of Israeli policies, will face the consequences of smearing Tutu -- a hero to millions and leader of a movement that was known for the massively disproportionate involvement of numerous South African Jews.

But it's the craven behavior of the administrators of St. Thomas that will likely be a mark of shame for years to come. While it's understandable, given the Church's history of virulent anti-Semitism, that a Catholic institution would be extra sensitive about relations with Jews, it's not clear here that there was any real pressure to cave in to. Did groups threaten to picket? Who knows what administrators were thinking?

Regardless, the backlash has already begun. Marv Davidov, an adjunct professor within the Justice and Peace Studies program said:

"As a Jew who experienced real anti-Semitism as a child, I'm deeply disturbed that a man like Tutu could be labeled anti-Semitic and silenced like this," he says. "I deeply resent the Israeli lobby trying to silence any criticism of its policy. It does a great disservice to Israel and to all Jews."

To make matters worse, when Cris Toffolo, the chair of the Justice and Peace Studies program told Tutu what happened and warned him of a possible smear campaign, she was immediately demoted.

Davidov again:

"This is pure bullshit," says Davidov. "As far as fighting for civil rights, I consider Tutu to be my brother. And I consider Cris Toffolo to be my sister. They're messing with my family here. If Columbia permits a Holocaust denier [iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad] to speak at their university, why are St. Thomas officials refusing to let Tutu, an apostle of nonviolence, speak at ours?"

"What happened at the University of St. Thomas is not an isolated event," says Toffolo. "Until we have an honest debate about U.S. policy related to Israel, and about Israeli policy in the Occupied Territories, the spiral of violence will continue."

Why Tutu? Why now? Are his statements anti-Semitic?

Bishop Tutu is closely associated with Sabeel, a Jerusalem based Christian liberation theology organization started by Palestinian Anglican pastor Rev. Naim Ateek. Sabeel is "an international peace movement initiated by Palestinian Christians in the Holy Land who seek a just peace based on two states-Palestine and Israel-as defined by international law and existing United Nations resolutions."The group, and founder Naim Ateek in particular, have come under considerable attack by mainstream Jewish organizations that see their influence on domestic Christian organizations as a threat.

Sabeel works with local Christian partners to hold conferences in major cities across the United States. To the consternation of many, Bishop Tutu will be the featured speaker in late October at the Boston Sabeel conference. The conference title? "The Apartheid Paradigm in Palestine-Israel:Issues of Justice and Equality."

Members of my group, Jewish Voice for Peace, have spoken at a handful of Sabeel conferences, and our Boston chapter is sponsoring a peace walk at the Boston conference.

As one JVP colleague who participated in several Sabeel conferences told me, she believed that Naim Atteek was guilty, at most, at times of being unaware of Jewish sensitivities around using certain Christian theological language (in fact, she publicly challenged him on this issue), but that he is ultimately advocating for a nonviolent resolution that recognizes the humanity and rights of both Jews and Palestinians. Of that, she has no doubt. (There are, to be sure, plenty of Palestinian sensitivities around language as well, though there is little interest among leaders of a variety of faiths in learning what those might be.)

Interestingly, the same can perhaps be said for Bishop Tutu, whose 2002 Sabeel speech seems to be the primary evidence offered for the cancellation of his talk. It's impossible to convey the spirit of his talk by quoting only bits and pieces, so read it. Read the whole thing, especially the part cited by St. Thomas' Doug Hennes where he says Tutu compared Israel to Hitler.

The talk is notable for its philo-Semitism and its equally passionate condemnation of Israel's occupation of Palestinian land and people. For anyone who has been to the Occupied Territories, let alone lived through it, his words of condemnation are impossible to argue with. His language is challenging in part because it is imbued with the disappointment of a Christian raised to look up to Jews, and the heartache of an anti-apartheid leader who was once buoyed by passionate Jewish support. He struggles to make sense of the checkpoints, the home demolitions, the land confiscations, done by a state that says it represents the very same people.

What is clear is that he at times uses language loosely without understanding how it might hurt or offend us Jews. Does that make him an anti-Semite? Of course not. Should he be banned for using a term like "Jewish lobby" that makes many of us uncomfortable? Are you kidding?

Tutu never wavers in expressing his love of and hope for peace and security for both peoples. "Peace based on justice," Tutu says, "is possible. We will do all we can to assist you to achieve this peace, because it is God's dream, and you will be able to live amicably together as sisters and brothers. "

[SaggyBalls]

Thank You Birdy!

" It's impossible to convey the spirit of his talk by quoting only bits and pieces, so read it. Read the whole thing, especially the part cited by St. Thomas' Doug Hennes where he says Tutu compared Israel to Hitler."

I see the connection, but does that villify an entire race? nope. Just a falsely created nation state's bureaucracy and every nation that supports it. Touchy subject indeed. I just hope people don't start making lampshades out of people to bring any sort of decorative retribution.

[phishtaper]

really offensive comment, YT. just sayin'.

[Birdy]

AGH!

not to come to YT's defense here because i'm sure he won't need it,

but did you read the articles I quoted above PT?

why is what he wrote a 'really offensive comment'?

[phishtaper]

although quite rare and often exaggerated, the nazi practice of making trophies, including several verified lampshapes, from the tattooed skin of slaughtered jews is one of the single darkest moments in human history.

while YT's reference demonstrates some knowledge of the practice, the casualness of it is offensive.

[Kanada Kev]

although quite rare and often exaggerated, the nazi practice of making trophies, including several verified lampshapes, from the tattooed skin of slaughtered jews is one of the single darkest moments in human history.

while YT's reference demonstrates some knowledge of the practice, the casualness of it is offensive.

Agreed! I read it twice to see what you were talking about PT. As soon as I read the word "lampshade" i knew right away. "Decorative Retribution"? Nasty.

As for Tutu, I haven't really heard about any of this. Thanks for posting. I've only been impressed by Tutu. I remember one interview with him on TV and I was completely mesmerized by him. I could 'feel' his goodness and compassion. An incredible individual. Seems like he's getting some comments taken out of context ... how surprising?! Ugh.

[Birdy]

Not so surprising, actually. Read your line above the Tutu bit, and the post above that.

[phishtaper]

are you suggesting that I took YT's comment out of context, Birdy?

[Kanada Kev]

[color:purple]eyeshadow

Edited November 26, 2008 by Guest

[Birdy]

Do you think you assumed something when you posted that the practice of making lampshades out of human skin was one of the darkest points in human history? Do you think you assumed YT trivialized that with his choice of words?

Just like Desmond Tutu has been the victim of such assumptions, so apparently has YT.

Not to elevate him to Tutu's status of course!

Edited November 26, 2008 by Guest

[Birdy]

For what it's worth, I'm not going to argue the need for sensitive language, as I can clearly see why such language has been adopted and held to over the years.

I am going to try and show though how the sensitivity of this has led us to a point where we can't comfortably talk about it without getting upset and thinking the worst.

I think that's an important thing to point out, as some of the shit Israel is doing in this world today is by no doubt a war crime and pretty fucking horrific. And if we're at a point today when we get offended at something that surely wasn't meant to be offensive, we're in effect never going to be able to tackle the bigger problems.

[phishtaper]

Do you think you assumed something when you posted that the practice of making lampshades out of human skin was one of the darkest points in human history?

Im not really sure what oyu are trying to do here birdy. that point was one of the darkest in human history. period.

Do you think you assumed YT trivialized that with his choice of words?

of course the words trivialized the events when they were contructed as a bad joke involving decorating.

Just like Desmond Tutu has been the victim of such assumptions, so apparently has YT.

again, the phrase itself is offensive by any standard. that's all i said. what i did assume was that YT may not have been sensitive to the gravity of lampshades.

[d_rawk]

I understand that YT was stating a (sincere) hope that injustice being done within Israel and the occupied territories does not escalate to the level of holocaust type violence. It is a severe misstep, I think, for several reasons, to use that particular example in that context, but I understand what he was attempting to get at and will leave it at that.

I was just as concerned about

He brings up some good points here that should be considered, because ultimately today (many would agree) it is very hard to be critical of Israel (as I don't think anyone last night was even remotely being critical of Israel, but the very mention of the subject brought out all the voices)

No doubt it is difficult to be critical of Israel .. that is a very complicated situation and a living testimony to how pain begets pain, even in its attempts at healing. However, you made the leap that caused much of the fuss all over again and I worry missed some of the point. Equating all of Jewry with Israel, and conflating political feelings about the one with the other.

Kosher food became Zionism by YT's connection. When that connection caused a stir, he admitted that he was 'just baiting' us. Fine, so I took the bait - he made an outlandish assertion to get some people fired up, and got them fired up. And now you express surprise about the "sad reflection".

[hamilton]

I was just as concerned about

He brings up some good points here that should be considered, because ultimately today (many would agree) it is very hard to be critical of Israel (as I don't think anyone last night was even remotely being critical of Israel, but the very mention of the subject brought out all the voices)

No doubt it is difficult to be critical of Israel .. that is a very complicated situation and a living testimony to how pain begets pain, even in its attempts at healing. However, you made the leap that caused much of the fuss all over again and I worry missed some of the point. Equating all of Jewry with Israel, and conflating political feelings about the one with the other.

Kosher food became Zionism by YT's connection. When that connection caused a stir, he admitted that he was 'just baiting' us. Fine, so I took the bait - he made an outlandish assertion to get some people fired up, and got them fired up. And now you express surprise about the "sad reflection".

Bingo.

If YT had said, "I am disgusted by the actions of the Israeli government in the West Bank" and then people had accused of of being anti-Semitic, that indeed would have been a "sad reflection". But that ain't what happened.

[SaggyBalls]

Of course I trivialized some of the darkest parts of History. I think much of what's happened has been trivialized in the past 30 years by us not really moving past that chapter in history and continuing to allow entirely terrible things to happen around the world...

...well, mostly in poor countries where our citizens don't want to think about.

Collectively we are a very passive people that don't really assert our love and support of our fellow man...if we in fact have these qualities. Maybe we think them and talk about them and maybe do some nice things for charity...but really, our collective complacency and desire to 'not rock the boat' are far worse than any off colour joke I could ever make about the holocaust.

I don't think it's difficult to be critical of Israel. I also don't think it's difficult to be critical of Canada, the United States, England, or any other nation state.

It's not difficult for us to criticize religion or consumerism or eating meat or a lack of environmental stewardship, how can it be difficult to criticize Israel for not taking the opportunity to show the world why it's the holy land.

'sensitive to the gravity of lampshades'

IBM, Ford, and Standard oil are all still in business and well supported nations that contributed heavily to the success of the Holocaust and the Nazi forces. They were also well paid for their 'work'.

I'm AWARE of the gravity of the lampshades and I'm well within my boundaries to challenge anyone's sensibilities about this subject because the subject has challenged our sensibilities and boundaries (or should have) so much already.

A comment like mine should have no more affect than listening to a giant beast scream its life away as its tongue curls to the sky and blood gushes out its neck.

Is my casualness more offensive than the fact that it's ultimitely necessary for people to do/say something about much of anything instead of blindly debating issues to make us feel important?

[Thorgnor]

Bringing things up without reproducing hatred might be a good way to start.

Ibm and Ford arn't nations, their corporations.

Speaking of minimizing murder and mayhem, anybody heard about the Albino murders in southern Somalia? The CBC was continually saying "witchdoctor" and it got me really mad. If they were collecting flowers they'd be Shaman or Healers, use the wrong ingredients, you're a witchdoctor.

[Birdy]

Did i really make a 'leap'? I don't think so. I totally agree it's problematic to equate world Jewry with Israel, but it happens all of the time and is the reason I posted those articles on Tutu.

[SaggyBalls]

WitchDoctor/Shaman...what's the difference?

Without reproducing hatred? that's not up to me. I'm not hating anybody and i didn't affirm that I did. Political correctness has its place but not in a frank discussion, which is obviously my aim.

I know IBM and Ford are corporations. Where's the accountability?

We're gonna have to make some to take care of all this crap. Unfortunately some people are too preoccupied with maintaining a status quo.

[d_rawk]

Did i really make a 'leap'?

I'll settle for 'an abrupt transition from A to C'

Thanks for the Tutu article, BTW. I wasn't aware that all of that had been happening. I have all sorts of respect and admiration for that man, and his ecumenical spirit is an inspiration.

[edit to add:]

I totally agree it's problematic to equate world Jewry with Israel, but it happens all of the time

exactly. Hence last night's shitshow.

Edited November 27, 2008 by Guest

[Birdy]

hence "sad reflection".

I wonder how many people would opt to buy local goods if they knew that part of the money they spent on their food might fund Zionism.

The shit show spurned from this wonder and suggestion of a possibility. YT didn't make an outlandish assertion. You took his mentioning it and it's lack of relevance and turned it into an outlandish assertion on your own accord, as did others. Which for him, obviously was hook, line and sinker to his bait. And for me, was a solidification that there still exists a continual need for sensitive language and that some things are still off topic to be introduced into a discussion for fear of appearing 'anti-semitic'. Hence, Tutu.

Edited November 27, 2008 by Guest

[d_rawk]

if they knew that part of the money they spent on their food might fund Zionism.

So 'wonder' and 'might' exempt culpability from suggesting this same connection in a decade's old meme about a Jewish conspiracy?

I get what you are saying Birdy, and I sort of kinda get what YT was doing. There is something to be said for forthrightness and saying what you mean when 'conversation' rather than 'debate' is what is being pursued.

*sigh*

Score one for YT and his grand social experiment, then. I'm going to go pinch some hamsters to see if they squeak. Results of the experiment forthcoming.

[bradm]

I'm going to go pinch some hamsters to see if they squeak. Results of the experiment forthcoming.

Not quite the results of d_jango's experiment.

Aloha,

Brad