Correcting Jeff Goldberg On Gaza & Jeff Responds
The Atlantic's Jeff Goldberg is concerned that one of this year's MacArthur Genius Grant recipients, filmmaker James Longley is "anti-Israel" and "not particularly clever." He also notes that it is "alas, no surprise" that Longley is on the MacArthur list. As evidence of Longley's bias, Goldberg cites the following quote from the filmmaker.
"To my great relief, the Palestinians in the Gaza Strip turned out to be people like everyone else. It's the situation they find themselves in that is extraordinary: The Gaza Strip is essentially an open-air prison for Palestinian refugees, guarded on all sides by the Israeli military. Barely 28 miles long and 4 miles wide, it contains more than 1,200,000 Palestinians - over one third of them living in squalid refugee camps built in 1948 to hold the people forced out of their homes by the creation of modern-day Israel. It is one of the most densely populated places on the planet. Nobody can pass through its borders without the permission of the Israeli soldiers. Like the West Bank, the Gaza Strip has been under Israeli military occupation since 1967. Most people living in the Gaza Strip have never known a single day of real freedom."
But I've got some news for Goldberg. Everything Longley says in that statement is true.
Below is a compilation of Longley's statements (in italics) followed by Goldberg's attempted rebuttals, then the facts:
Longley: "Palestinians in the Gaza Strip turned out to be people like everyone else.
Goldberg: ""Essentially true -- I make much the same argument in my book on the subject. Except that some residents of Gaza are, in fact, members of a suicide terrorist organization who seek out their enemy's children to kill. This is fairly unusual. Only the Tamils in Sri Lanka have constructed a similar cult. So this would be worth mentioning.
It's good that Goldberg agrees that Palestinians in Gaza are "people like everyone else." He then notes, accurately, that "some residents" of Gaza are suicide bombers and criticizes Longley for not mentioning it. Why should he? Israel itself concedes that hundreds of the people killed in the war - i.e, the victims of the human rights violations the United Nations' report cites - were noncombatants including 320 children.
Longley: "The Gaza Strip is essentially an open-air prison for Palestinian refugees, guarded on all sides by the Israeli military."
Goldberg: "No, not true. The Strip shares a border with Egypt, an Arab state."
No, Gaza is a prison because the border with Egypt is closed at the insistence of Israel. Gaza has no open borders with anyone.
Longley: "[I]t contains more than 1,200,000 Palestinians - over one third of them living in squalid refugee camps built in 1948 to hold the people forced out of their homes by the creation of modern-day Israel."
Goldberg: "There are very few refugees left in Gaza. The children and grandchildren of these refugees are not, according to international law, refugees. They are only considered 'refugees' because the Arab states have refused to resettle them or build them permanent housing. Also, not all Palestinians who fled Israel in 1948 were 'driven out.' Some fled areas of fighting, some were expelled by Jewish forces, and some left of their own accord."
It does not matter whether or not they are refugees, the children of refugees or the cousins of refugees. What matters is that there are 1.2 million Palestinians trapped in Gaza living in dire conditions as a result of first a blockade, then a war, and now a blockade again. Goldberg cannot deny the mass human suffering inflicted on the Palestinians of Gaza so he challenges their refugee status!
Longley: "It is one of the most densely populated places on the planet."
Goldberg: "Not true. Most cities in the world are more densely populated than Gaza. Manhattan, for instance, is more densely populated than Gaza. Also, Cairo. And many suburbs of major cities, as well."
Yes, Manhattan is more densely populated than Gaza, largely because in Manhattan about a million people live in high-rise buildings. Gazans live closer to the ground, hence the density is rather less pleasant. Additionally, Manhattanites who suffer from the density can move to Queens or Staten Island. Gazans live in a ghetto without exits.
Longley: "Nobody can pass through its borders without the permission of the Israeli soldiers."
Goldberg: "Not true. The Egyptians could lift their blockade of Gaza, which would allow easy passage."
Wrong. Several influential members of Congress have made it clear to the Egyptians that any loosening of the border will result in a dramatic cut in US aid to Egypt.
Longley: "Like the West Bank, the Gaza Strip has been under Israeli military occupation since 1967."
Goldberg: "Not true. During the 1990s, most parts of the West Bank and Gaza Strip were under the control of the Palestinian Authority. In 2005, Israel withdrew its soldiers and settlers from Gaza and turned over control of the entire area to the Palestinian Authority."
Israel withdrew from Gaza under fire from Hamas. The Palestinian Authority of Mahmoud Abbas had asked Israel to negotiate its withdrawal with the PA so that the withdrawal would not be followed by a Hamas takeover of the area. Israel flat-out refused to negotiate over a withdrawal it insisted must be "unilateral." Not surprisingly, when the IDF pulled out, Hamas moved in - just as Abbas predicted. In fact, Gaza remains under Israeli control. Israelis - not Palestinians - control its borders.
As for the West Bank, it has never known a day of Palestinian sovereignty. Under Oslo, Israel allowed the Palestinian Authority to control certain patches of territory but ultimate control always rested with Israel, as it does today.
Longley: "Most people living in the Gaza Strip have never known a single day of real freedom."
Goldberg: "This is partially true, though Gaza knew no freedom when it was occupied by the Egyptian military until 1967. And of course, 'real freedom' is not a prevailing condition in most of the Arab Middle East. But Longley is not interested in the complications of life in the Arab world, or in Israel, and God knows, he could make honest films that still expose various Israeli sins. But he doesn't seem to be someone who closely adheres to the truth. He seems mainly interested, in the Middle East context, in libeling Israel. Which, of course, is good for business, as we see this week."
Goldberg agrees with Longley. Palestinians have not known a single day of real freedom. That is it in a nutshell. I'm glad Goldberg recognizes it.
Jeff Goldberg responds to this post calling me a "cut and paste" libeler. The old joke about "Harvard men" applies to neocons even more. "You can always tell a neocon, but you can't tell him much." Note, however, that Goldberg rebuts none of my facts about Gaza because he can't.
MJ Rosenberg is aSenior Fellow on foreign policy at Media Matters Action Network where this is cross-posted.
September 24, 2009 3:08 PM | Reply | Permalink
Interesting thought there, AnnaA. Occupation = freedom?
And please do put one or two verifiable citations up for Gazans (all of them, apparently) having stated a goal of "murdering all Jews in the world".
September 24, 2009 3:12 PM | Reply | Permalink
Yes, American occupation of Germany, Japan and Iraq brought freedom to Germans, Japaneses and Iraqis.
Even not all Germans wanted to kill all Jews. I don't claim that all Palestinians share the officially stated goal of Hamas to murder all Jews.
September 24, 2009 3:38 PM | Reply | Permalink
OK, so you are able to qualify it? Numbers? Verifiable proof?
Let the backpedaling begin...
September 24, 2009 6:48 PM | Reply | Permalink
Anna is like those old Stalinists who got their line from Moscow and just repeated it.
Like a Stalinist, her views only hold together when you understand that she has no choice but to mouth the party line and will turn on a dime when she gets a new one.
September 24, 2009 3:17 PM | Reply | Permalink
MJ is like those old Stalinists or new Obamist who got their line from Moscow and just repeated it.
Like a Stalinist or Obamist, his views only hold together when you understand that he has no choice but to mouth the party line and will turn on a dime when he gets a new one.
September 24, 2009 3:32 PM | Reply | Permalink
So clearly you do agree with my repeating of your statement that occupation equates to freedom, and I am still waiting for your verifiable citations that every Gazan has stated that their goal is the murder of all Jews in the world.
Something tells me I'm going to be waiting a while on that one. Now go read your Orwell...
September 24, 2009 3:40 PM | Reply | Permalink
Yes, American occupation of Germany, Japan and Iraq brought freedom to Germans, Japaneses and Iraqis.
Even not all Germans wanted to kill all Jews. I don't claim that all Palestinians share the officially stated goal of Hamas to murder all Jews.
September 24, 2009 6:12 PM | Reply | Permalink
Japaneses?
No, you're not a racist.
And this is what, exactly? Some sort of false moral equivalency for rationalizing occupation? By what perverse redefinition is occupation freedom?
Tell you what - I'll come "occupy" your house, and you can tell everyone how free you are then. I'm an American, so it's clearly going to be OK, isn't it? Will you welcome me with flowers and sweets?
September 24, 2009 6:51 PM | Reply | Permalink
...the officially stated goal of Hamas to murder all Jews.
As much as you repeat this, you may consider placing it as a permanent sign-off like a good Twain quote (or use it for your username?).
Oh, and while making no apologies for Hamas' militant factions, reading the Hamas Charter I just can't locate the article or section that describes this officially stated goal that you repeat ad nauseam (you seem to be reading a different translation).
September 25, 2009 12:03 AM | Reply | Permalink
annaA in a nutshell:
1. take what someone else writes and substitute a couple of different words which he has done above
2. A makes criticism P about israel. the US is also guilty of P. Therefore, P is dismissed.
3. MJ makes claim P. MJ has also made past claims which are inconsistent with P. Therefore, P is false.
4. quote commentary magazine
September 24, 2009 5:21 PM | Reply | Permalink
MJ, could you forward this memo to our Likudnik Information Officer, AnnaA:
Ms. AnnaA: You might have more credibility if you stopped talking about the condition of Arabs as a collective, instead of as individual cases (or nations). Let me give you some examples about Arab freedom. I have relatives who live in Amman. They are very free to travel, see relatives, leave the country...and generally live great lives. However, criticizing the king in the newspaper is discouraged. Not ideal, but hardly a nightmare.
I have other relatives who live in the Gulf and have a high standard of living, travel freely, etc. Again, criticizing the Emir in the press is discouraged.
But the only relatives who lives are a living hell are those who live under Zionist Occupation. They have had relatives shot at, property destroyed, and countless episodes of humiliation at the hands of some grubby Russian wearing an IDF uniform.
In short, AnnaA, if you are to talk about Arabs--and their lack of freedom--focus on those Arabs who live under Zionist Occupation. They are the ones who truly have never known a day of freedom....and particularly the freedom that comes from a day without humiliation.
September 24, 2009 5:12 PM | Reply | Permalink
"Anna" is hopeless. Her/his humsnity only extends to people she feels ethnic kinship to.
September 24, 2009 5:21 PM | Reply | Permalink
Really? Israel has never killed as many Palestinians in 10 years as Jordan managed to killed in 10 days.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Black_September_in_JordanSeptember 24, 2009 5:29 PM | Reply | Permalink
mythbuster makes criticism P about israel. annaA says jordan is also guilty of P. Therefore, P is dismissed.
September 24, 2009 6:14 PM | Reply | Permalink
Actually, it's worse. So long as a there is a rumor of genocide in Rwanda, military brutality in Burma, or the common cold everywhere.....Israel cannot be criticized! In fact, only when Christ begins His 1,000 year Reign of Perfect Peace, then, and only then, may Israel be questioned.
September 24, 2009 6:39 PM | Reply | Permalink
Cheer up, AnnaA. Your beloved IDF probably killed between 10 and 20 thousand civilians in Lebanon in the summer of 1982.
September 24, 2009 11:50 PM | Reply | Permalink
Speaking of people killed, the majority of whom are probably children, Israel refuses to provide a map of the minefields it left in Lebanon following its withdrawal in 2000.
But then, of course, Israel informed the International Court of Justice that human rights treaties do not apply to what she does in the Palestinian Territory so perhaps the Lebanonese have no right to know where Israeli land mines are hidden in Lebanon?
September 25, 2009 10:57 AM | Reply | Permalink
Alas, MB, you were going fine there until the part about the "grubby Russian."
September 24, 2009 5:36 PM | Reply | Permalink
I used it intentionally. There is nothing quite as galling to a Palestinian as a Russian immigrant informing a Palestinian that they are tresspassing. And, yes, I've had personal experience with a Russian, having gone through a checkpoint. It really pissed me off.
September 24, 2009 6:46 PM | Reply | Permalink
MB, I went to Nablus with a Palestinian cab driver who had gone to university in Russia (and worked as a cab driver, because that's one example of what apartheid means in East Jerusalem). Nablus was then under complete blockade. The two Russian soldiers at the checkpoint were very nice when we chatted them up about good old Russia. They showed us how to sneak in.
Soldiers are trained and conditioned to be as*les, but sometimes one can dig the human being from underneath.
September 24, 2009 7:42 PM | Reply | Permalink
So true. But I'm just trying to deflate the "the IDF are real professionals" balloon that the Likudites like to let fly in this comment section.
However, this story from Mondoweiss is truly depressing. See http://mondoweiss.net/2009/09/rahm-no-place-for-hamas.html#more-9431
If this is the advice President Obama is getting, then Abbas should go home now.
September 25, 2009 12:05 PM | Reply | Permalink
So what MJ, I make you that uncomfortable that you cannot deal with my post?
September 24, 2009 6:27 PM | Reply | Permalink
Thrust into the unusual position of defending MJ, I am constrained to ask: Why should he?
September 24, 2009 10:21 PM | Reply | Permalink
All true and great, and as you point out, done not only with the tacit agreement of the obama administration but with its strong support. Which doesn't stop you from praising Obama's complicity and surrender and pretending it is some clever game that will lead to "peace," nor from ignoring any real challenge to the double US-Israel act.
Obama spent a few months trying to get a pretty small concession, a settlement freeze, without applying any meaningful pressure, and Netanyahu called his bluff. So now he gives up on even this small demand and wants "negotiations without precondition." Here is how Ali Abunimnah describes the absurdity.
As I wrote to mythbuster and you decided to delete:
As much as it sucks to let criminals go unpunished, I understand well that sometimes it is unavoidable to let bygones be bygones as part of a reconciliation process. But there is no such process and no hope for one unless Israelis begin to pay a high enough price for continuing colonization. Obama won't do it. It's up to Palestinians with international civic help to do it. If we fail, this will get worse and worse and genocide is almost guaranteed as you say. And then Obama and MJ and the rest of the world will tsk-tsk and say how awful that is and how nobody could have predicted it. We've seen it before. Here today we have Susan Rice shedding crocodile tears about her role in the Rwandan Genocide.
September 24, 2009 6:30 PM | Reply | Permalink
CONTINUED
And in the same breath she offers diplomatic cover for the butchers of Gaza and therefore pave the ways for a future in gaza that could be every bit as ghastly as Rwanda. But people like Rice never learn. Like Obama, their job depends on their making the same "mistakes" again and again with ever new argument why this time it is going to be different. So now we have Obama doing repeating Bush strategy of never ever applying pressure on Israel, repeating Clinton's strategy of helping Israel railroad Palestinian negotiators "without preconditions," and everybody expects it to lead miraculously to a different outcome.
Putting pressure to get these war crimes and crimes against humanity punished and stopped is essential. In addition to BDS, this is pretty much the only thing that we can do that really can make a difference. What Obama offers and his groupies here swallow is doing nothing and letting the slow genocide get worse and worse. Here is what is just around the corner: Cholera, chronic kidney disease, and massive mortality:
Leave MJ to cheer for Obama and take action now:
September 24, 2009 6:31 PM | Reply | Permalink
All good points. I'm still trying to recover from Gordon Brown's comments at the UN. The UK wants an end to nuclear weapons but must preserve a minimal nuclear arsenal.
Money quote: ""I pledge that the United Kingdom will retain only the absolute minimum credible and continuing nuclear deterrent capability," he said." See http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/politics/8273501.stm
Pretty good summary of Western hypocrisy.
September 24, 2009 6:53 PM | Reply | Permalink
And I wanted to put some links, but they never get posted. TPM is fiercely defensive of the tender soul of the readers.
Tthese sites are good places to start about what to do
The official BDS website: www dot bdsmovement dot net
International Solidarity movement (Bi'lin etc.) palsolidarity dot org
The US Campaign to End the Occupation: www dot endtheoccupation dot org
US Academic and Cultural Boycott: usacbi dot wordpress dot com
Gaza Freedom March www dot gazafreedommarch dot org
September 24, 2009 7:52 PM | Reply | Permalink
This conversation between Hasbara agent v the rest is mildly interesting but the point I and thousands of others worldwide which to make is:
when are those who were responsible for killing hundreds of unarmed women and children in Gaza in January, going to be brought before the ICC to face charges of war crimes.
There they will have the opportunity to bring proof in their defense that these, now dead, unarmed civilians were a threat to the heavily armed IDF.
Netanyahu omitted to mention this particular point when addressing the UN today. He merely said that the army took extraordinary care using surgical strikes against those responsible for firing rockets and that Hamas used civilians as shields. In fact, the UN report confirmed that it was the Israeli army that used human shields.
Let the truth be decided before an international court.
September 24, 2009 8:02 PM | Reply | Permalink
when are those who were responsible for killing thousands of unarmed women and children in Afghanistan going to be brought before the ICC to face charges of war crimes? When will Obama join Milutinovic and other war criminals?
September 24, 2009 8:36 PM | Reply | Permalink
Are you the character from "Munich" (played by Daniel Craig) who said that only Jewish blood mattered....?
I just wonder if you are half-Jewish or a late convert because you've demonstrate the fanaticism of the insecure. In Catholicism, we call this being more Catholic than the Pope.
September 25, 2009 12:10 PM | Reply | Permalink
goldberg has unresolved issues for being picked on as a kid for being jewish. he has yet to get over it. he says that is one reason he joined the IDF.
Then I woke up, ate a bowl of Rice Krispies, and walked to school—the Howard T. Herber Middle School—where a sixth-grade pogromist named Patrick Harrington and his Cossack associates pitched pennies at me in a game sometimes known as “Bend the Jew,” which ended, inevitably, with me being jumped for refusing to pick up the aforementioned pennies, and also for killing Jesus. It is in part because of young Mr. Harrington and his lieutenants that I would later join the Israeli army. [link]
feeling powerless as a kid has made him attracted to power. he was a cheerleader for the iraq war. alexander cockburn wrote of him in 2003:
Who's the hack? I nominate The New Yorker's Jeffrey Goldberg. He's the new Remington, though without the artistic talent. Back in 1898, William Randolph Hearst was trying to fan war fever between the United States and Spain. He dispatched a reporter and the artist Frederic Remington to Cuba to send back blood-roiling depictions of Spanish beastliness to Cuban insurgents. Remington wired to say he could find nothing sensational to draw and could he come home. Famously, Hearst wired him, "Please remain. You furnish the pictures and I'll furnish the war." Remington duly did so. [link]
when he is not busy accusing others of anti-semitism, [link], he helps netanyahu beat the war drums against iran.
one good thing about him, he does get that the settlers are wacko zealots. that's the yin within the yang. but the settlements are the policy of the israeli government and the settlers are just implementing that policy.
hey goldberg, you are no longer six years old and no one is picking on you now. drop the war macho!
September 24, 2009 8:43 PM | Reply | Permalink
I wish it was true.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hamas
September 24, 2009 9:38 PM | Reply | Permalink
while hamas wishes to kill jews en masse, isreal is actually killing palestinians at 100:1 ratio and is starving a whole population and treating them like animals. if you want to read something, also read Brigadier-General Avi Ronzki's pamphlet that he distributed to the IDF soldiers before the gaza war. and he is a rabbi!
annaA, you only see the crazies on the other side of the wall. i see the crazies on both sides of the wall.
September 24, 2009 10:21 PM | Reply | Permalink
Obama is actually killing civilian Afgans at 100000000000000:1 ratio.
September 24, 2009 10:35 PM | Reply | Permalink
israel is to the usa as mini me is to dr. evil. so what's your point?
September 24, 2009 10:38 PM | Reply | Permalink
Well, Finally you understand that Obama is dr. ev.
Its a good step.
September 24, 2009 11:27 PM | Reply | Permalink
That is interesting. I never was picked on as a kid for being a Jew in schools which (at most) had less than six others. I got picked on sometimes but there was bo ethnic component.
Maybe all the neocon types are just getting back at the kids who abused them. So Pat Harrington is mean to Jeff and Ahmed pays the price.
September 25, 2009 7:28 AM | Reply | Permalink
war-monger norm podhoretz was also picked on and bullied as a kid by the blacks in his neighborhood. He tells the story here: My Negro Problem
i wonder what lurks in william 'the bloody' kristol's unconscious.
September 25, 2009 10:03 AM | Reply | Permalink
When writing an article purporting to offer "corrections," it is important to get one's facts straight.
MJ writes: "Israel itself concedes that most of the people killed in the war - i.e, the victims of the human rights violations the United Nations' report cites - were noncombatants including 320 children."
This is false. According to Israeli figures, there were 1,166 killed, including 295 non-combatants, 89 under age 16, and 49 women. I make no claim as to the accuracy of these figures or those provided by the Palestinians or Israeli human rights groups. Perhaps even this number is too much. But it's just plain false to claim that Israel concedes something when in fact they hotly dispute it.
The rest of these "corrections" are simply disagreements with Goldberg's emphasis, rather than real items of factual dispute.
September 24, 2009 10:51 PM | Reply | Permalink
Logical fallacy: If you can't vouch for the numbers, you can't accuse someone else of falsity.
September 25, 2009 1:16 PM | Reply | Permalink
Surely you can appreciate the difference between "Israel concedes" and "Israel disputes." The former is false in this instance.
September 25, 2009 2:14 PM | Reply | Permalink
Actually, MJ - to his credit - appears to have modified his language.
September 25, 2009 2:15 PM | Reply | Permalink
It has been substantiated that Israel killed over 300 unarmed children/ young people plus over 100 of their mothers.
They were killed in order to terrorize the civilian population. They were targeted as an integral part of the 'surgical strikes' so proudly claimed by Netanyahu in his UN defense of Israel's actions against a civilian population.
It is clear that these killings were no collateral damage. It is clear that these children and mothers were not responsible for the actions of a few militants who had fired rockets into Israel. It is clear that this was an atrocity and it is clear those Israeli commanders who authorized such war crimes must be brought before the ICC.
ps It is also clear that the Hasbara contributor, Mr Annaa, and his defense of Israeli atrocities by attempting to draw parallels with US actions in Afghanistan is an unconvincing apologist. Gaza is not Afghanistan and the US has never targeted women and children or any unarmed civilians. To do so is a WAR CRIME,
September 25, 2009 4:32 AM | Reply | Permalink
The most bizarre thing in in the Goldberg quotes that MJ reports is this:
They [the residents of Gaza] are only considered 'refugees' because the Arab states have refused to resettle them or build them permanent housing.
Actually, they are considered refugees because Israel has refused to let them return to their homes in territory controlled by Israel. The Arab states are not responsible for people who have become refugees because of Israeli policies.
September 25, 2009 7:00 AM | Reply | Permalink
PS: I don't profess to an expertise in international law, but I think you're wrong on this. My understanding is that the country to which they fled (in this case Egypt, and in others, Lebanon, Jordan, Lebanon, Syria, etc.), has an obligation to provide certain rights to refugees. Again, while I don't know the specifics, I think it's pretty clear that the host countries (with the possible exception of Jordan), have violated these obligations in the case of the Palestinian refugees. Certainly, those rights attach to the descendents of refugees born in the host country who constitute the overwhelming majority of those living in Gaza. Additionally, while refugees do have the right to return to their homes, that right comes with the cessation of hostilities. The fact is that the state of war has continued for these past 60 years. We all know, moreover, that the Arab states to which the refugees fled have used them as a political football, holding them in refugee camps and preventing their integration into society while demanding their return as an exhibit of Israel's perfidy. As a practical matter, it would have been (and still would be) insane for Israel to allow the return of hundreds of thousands (now millions) of refugees dedicated to the destruction of the country.
In the course of history there have been countless examples of realignments and displacements of populations as a result of wars, famine, migration and the like. Often, as in the case of the Palestinian refugees, the consequences are wrenching and tragic and they should not be understated. What appears unique in this situation is the way the refugees have been used, held in camps by their host countries (again, with the exception of Jordan, which has committed other sins) awaiting their triumphant return and reconquest of their land.
September 25, 2009 10:38 AM | Reply | Permalink
"In the course of history there have been countless examples of realignments and displacements of populations as a result of wars, famine, migration and the like"
In the course of history there have been countless examples of land theft, where conquerors drove out the previous inhabitants. And most of the time there's no justice. So far, the Palestinian case is one more on a long list.
September 25, 2009 12:43 PM | Reply | Permalink
AG says: "I don't profess to an expertise in international law, but I think you're wrong on this."
Actually, a person is a refugee if they have fled their country of origin. So your analysis is totally wrong. Nice try. (Sound of of Hasbara chevron being ripped from uniform....)
Please note that if you have to preamble your remarks with "I don't know squat about this, but....." you should probably refrain from commenting.
September 25, 2009 1:23 PM | Reply | Permalink
If you had read what I wrote, it is clear that I was responding to PS's assertion that: "The Arab states are not responsible for people who have become refugees because of Israeli policies."
Obviously, those who left in 48 are refugees. Their descendants from what I understand are unique in being considered such.
September 25, 2009 2:12 PM | Reply | Permalink
Maybe some careless wording on my part AG--what I meant to say was that the Arab states aren't responsible for the Palestinians becoming refugees or even for them remaining refugees. It is Israel that refused and continues to refuse to allow the people to return to their land--and as long as they are not allowed to return they remain refugees. What's completely disingenuous about Goldberg's statement is that he puts the blame for the Palestinians' status solely on the Arab states for not resettling them, ignoring the very obvious fact that the primary reason the Palestinians are refugees is because they have not been allowed to return to their homes since they fled the fighting or were driven out during the fighting. And it is Israel and only Israel that has prevented them from returning.
Certainly, Israel would love it if the children of Palestinian refugees lost their refugee status under international law (as is usually the case). But the international community has recognized that this is an unusual case, in which Israel has refused to recognize its obligation to allow the refugees to return, and has therefore ruled that the descendants of the original refugees remain refugees and retain the right to return or at least be compensated for their loss. Goldberg may not like that, but the law is what it is, and the Palestinians truly are refugees under international law and Israel ultimately is responsible for their status as refugees.
September 26, 2009 9:08 AM | Reply | Permalink
What is truly depressing about these conversations is the utter inability to even entertain the validity of an opposing point of view. It's as if Israel simply decided for reasons of sheer greed and wanton cruelty, to slaughter the defenseless, peace-loving Gazans. No acknowledgment is made of the context in which these awful events continue. (This is also the problem with the Goldstone report, but that is the subject for another post). I can assure you from personal experience that Israelis do not send their children off to war (all of their children, by the way, unlike the army of professionals we employ here in the US) lightly.
Until we can begin to see the conflict from the point of view of the "other," there is no possibility of reconciliation. By adopting the most irredentist expression of the Palestinian POV, the majority of the posters here offer nothing but a continuation of this terrible state of affairs.
September 25, 2009 10:53 AM | Reply | Permalink
False. We adopt a complete rejection of Israeli Apartheid. And we will win. You only end Apartheid by making the price of apartheid to high to bear.
If the ANC had listened to your advice, Black South Africans would still be carrying internal passports.
September 25, 2009 12:13 PM | Reply | Permalink
If the Palestinians had listened to my advice, they might be celebrating a decade (or likely more) of independent statehood.
If the Israelis had listened to my advice, they might (and here I'm not so sure, but since they've never given it a chance, it's at least a possibility) be living a somewhat normal co-existence with their neighbors.
Of course, no one listens to my advice. Not even my clients. They are usually the worse for it.
September 25, 2009 12:26 PM | Reply | Permalink
They are? Do you tell them to try their cases?
And this is classic: "If the Palestinians had listened to my advice, they might be celebrating a decade (or likely more) of independent statehood.'
Really? Where? The international apace station on the moon is not operational.
September 25, 2009 1:28 PM | Reply | Permalink
It's hard to tell if you're put downs are serious, but for the record, I help a great number of people in my job in tangible ways and am proud of it. I do it because I love it - I can and have made triple my current salary in the private sector. I hope you can say the same of yourself - everything except the salary part, that is.
September 25, 2009 2:31 PM | Reply | Permalink
I read this in total... it is a considered opinion piece with researched points...That others would take exception is no surprise but to slander the author is proof that the nerve has been hit!
Give it up...it is the 'selected by Pere's' Bibi that must come to grips with what has been done in the West Bank and Gaza!!! The rest of the World is no longer buying what he is selling!
September 25, 2009 12:14 PM | Reply | Permalink
Frequent poster Blue Pearl hurt Jeff Goldberg's feelings. G responds to me in the Atlantic but never addresses my points. He does however go after BP's points about Jeff being beat up in elementary school by the evil Pat Harrington. I didn't even know Jeff was smacked around as a child. If I did, I might go easy on him.
http://jeffreygoldberg.theatlantic.com/archives/2009/09/mj_rosenberg.php
September 25, 2009 12:15 PM | Reply | Permalink
I read Goldberg's post and it is directed at, and quotes, only you.
September 25, 2009 12:31 PM | Reply | Permalink
The second quote, from an email, is a classic of the Rosenberg smear style, where in a private email, he blames a misrepresentation of Goldberg's position on a quote from someone else, but doesn't post a public correction. It's obviously what the "cut and paste" in the title is referring to, i.e., "someone else said it, not me, it just happened to show up in my post."
How far Media Matters falls from its original raison d'etre remains to be seen, that should be interesting to watch.
September 25, 2009 1:07 PM | Reply | Permalink
Hi Art Appraiser: I think the following is wrong on every count. It's all about Art Appraising and its all wrong. Oh yeah, I don't know anything about art appraising. You do. And you don't know bupkes about my specialty.
"A few of the more significant areas of residential content appraisals include insurance appraisals, estate valuations and charitable donations. Insurance appraisals prove irrefutable possession and condition corroboration at the date of valuation, as well as providing the needed value protection and documentation in the event of a loss. Estate valuation and estate planning appraisals clarifies questions of property value, facilitating the preparation of estate tax reporting requirements while assisting heirs in equitable distribution and disposition planning. Charitable donation appraisals assist the donor in obtaining the accurate and documented fair market value which meets the exacting standards of the Internal Revenue Service
September 25, 2009 1:48 PM | Reply | Permalink
AA:
I hope you enjoyed your summer. I've lurked a bit but haven't posted in awhile, but since I have a bit part in this little incident, I'm dusting off the keyboard.
MJ just doesn't get Goldberg's point. It was not the fact that MJ disagrees with Goldberg on the merits that prompted Goldberg to write his blog. It's the fact that MJ in the raw, i.e. in the comments section, slimed Goldberg like the libelous bully he is. And now MJ's exposed, i.e. now it's a known fact that MJ slings filth like a two year-old sans ethics in his colloquies to the delight of his adoring six fans and to succor the Annas of the world who are addicted to loathing him.
AA you hit the nail on the head. I'm the one who, in an e-mail to Goldberg this morning, drew Goldberg's attention to MJ's hideous but ordinary course insult in the comment section that Goldberg responded to. MJ, following up on Bluepearl's observatons, chose to lob a personal insult at Goldberg, and he did so under the covers in the comments section at the Cafe.
In short, it wasn't enough for MJ to do what he initially did, i.e. challenge Goldberg on the merits (which is what Media Action presumably hired Rosenberg to do). Rather, MJ couldn't help himself; he needed to insult Goldberg by mocking Goldberg for writing that he was picked on as a kid for being a Jew and then--in classic Rosenberg libelous fashion--suggesting that Goldberg was responding in kind against Palestinians as a result. In short, once again MJ chose to get down in the muck and the mire and call Goldberg a bigot.
AA, as we know, for MJ the merits aren't enough; he really can't seem to help himself. And in this instance, to top things off, MJ, after lobbing a heinous insult at Goldberg, cries foul and complains that Goldberg doesn't address him on the merits. Utter and blatant and unambiguous hypocrisy. It is indeed just like that kid who murders his parents and cries for mercy before the court because he's an orphan.
I'm glad I turned Goldberg and all his readers on to MJ's comment section at the Cafe. Maybe it will temper him; maybe Media Action, as AA you properly suggest, will see the MJ we know and will take him out to the woodshed and learn him a little. Maybe then MJ will succeed at Media Action and be a force for positive change. Or....if history is a judge, maybe he'll keep on slinging mud and calling people racists--of course in the comments section at the Cafe as opposed to at Media Action where his behavior would never be tolerated. Maybe MJ will take joy in always getting some kind of an Anna to give himself and his little BDS cadre justification for getting down and dirty, and maybe, and really unfortunately, he won't be long at Media Action. After all, they are grown-ups there.
I have a soft spot for MJ; I really do hope he grows up. Tis the season after all, and perhaps G-d will forgive me for moving beyond my soft spot in taking him on.
All the best AA.
Bruce S. Levine
New York, New York
P.S. AG, I don't know where you get the patience to stick with this, but good luck and Shana Tova.
September 25, 2009 8:06 PM | Reply | Permalink
Bslev,
I love your righteousness. In your own mind, you are a lamed vovnik (look it up).
But facts are fact. My post was a pure rebuttal to Goldberg.
I didn't bring up his history at all. A wise poster did.
September 25, 2009 9:07 PM | Reply | Permalink
No, Bslev, I don't get taken to woodsheds for confronting neocons. It's why I'm hired.
September 25, 2009 9:10 PM | Reply | Permalink
As I wrote to IPF when they e-mailed the announcement of your departure, I do wish you luck MJ. But learn from your errors. You wrote a compelling post, one about which I agreed and disagreed, but one which you ruined when you chose to accuse Goldberg of bigotry. To the contrary, I hardly think that you were hired to call Jeffrey Goldberg a bigot, and if you were then Media Action would be a joke that I have never believed it to be.
Shana Tova, and while you mock the believers as you so often do, I bet you join me on Monday in seeking forgiveness for all kinds of transgressions (with or without Krauthammer), including for the type of self-righteousness I so often exhibit. I hold no monopoly on virtue. But I calls 'em as I sees 'em. And here I see Rosenberg the senior fellow at Media Action on the one hand, and Rosenberg the mud-slinging shit-stirring race-baiter on the other. One generates Annas, and one could change hearts and minds. All I can ask is that you step back from your need to win arguments, look past my self-rigteousness and the many flaws in me that I am so painfully aware of particularly at this time of the year, and think about what I'm saying.
Good luck.
September 25, 2009 9:42 PM | Reply | Permalink
Bslev, its Y-K so I do forgive you for your self-righteousness.
September 28, 2009 9:08 AM | Reply | Permalink
No, I didn't bring him his personal history, Blue Pearl did, and I'm glad he did. That is what Jeffrey is exercised about.
September 25, 2009 1:43 PM | Reply | Permalink
For a former "soldier," Goldberg sure comes across as a pussy in that piece. However, I do appreciate him polishing his human rights credentials by protecting Palestinians from IDF soldiers. I guess AnnaA will be careful to remind Mr. Goldberg that American soldiers abuse Muslims civilians a zillion times more than IDF-ers. (I lessened her risk fo carpal tunnel by preempting her Pavlovian cataloguing of America's "crimes.")
Finally, Mr. Goldberg's labeling of you as a "libeler" is the mark of cad. If true, he would bring a legal action against you because libel is not about hurt feelings, but a damaged reputation. He won't, possibly because his reputation was irretrievably damaged during his reporting of the Gaza Slaughter.
September 25, 2009 1:41 PM | Reply | Permalink
A cad! I like it.
September 25, 2009 2:18 PM | Reply | Permalink
I read your diary and Goldberg's smear of you before getting down to the comment thread between you and Blue Pearl. Goldberg's desperate dissembling is even more obvious from that order.
In Max Blumenthal's new book, he talks about how child abuse not only is central to the ideology of the Religious Right, but how its scars were psychologically formative for many of the movement's leaders. Maybe Max can do another book on childhood traumas and neo-cons.
September 25, 2009 3:35 PM | Reply | Permalink
Note, however, that Goldberg rebuts none of my facts about Gaza because he can't.
Let's see what we can do.
You are not making a point here that requires a rebuttal. Civilians being killed is not a war crime. The fact that you suggest it is displays an incredible amount of ignorance for the basic tenets of the laws of war. The UN report had absolutely zero proof for its conclusion that Israeli troops intentionally fired on civilians and it amazingly could not find proof that Hamas used civilians as shields, hid weapons in mosques, or fought in civilian clothes. All of which anyone could prove simply by looking at videos on you tube. Think about that. Their report is so transparent that it can be disproved by youtube.
Here is Hamas map detailing deliberate use of civilian infrastructure.
http://thebetterpartofvalour.wordpress.com/tag/war/page/3/
Here is Hamas bragging about using Human Shields
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ArJbn-lUCh4&feature=player_embedded
Gaza residents admit Hamas fired rockets from civilian homes
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Qgpg3ZexGJo&feature=player_embedded
Video of Hamas using children as Human shields
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2vHDyuSTneA&feature=player_embedded
Here is a video of a Hamas "fighter" in civilian clothes planting a bomb, hiding in a civilian house, and then pretending to be a civilian with a white flag.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YJgfZ9_6miE
Here is a video of a secondary explosion of a bombed mosque proving is was used to store weapons.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LCVr7MBhgj0
Here is a video of antiaircraft weapons found inside a mosque.
http://www.youtube.com/view_play_list?p=A586D4456482853E&playnext=1&playnext_from=PL&v=2Zd55Zhj5gQ
Longley is not referring to all Gazans. He is only referring to the 1/3 of them that are FORCED by their fellow Palestinians to remain in refugee camps. The real question is why are Gazans not allowed to leave the camps?
Conditions are just so dire in Gaza. Lets look at some shots from the Ramadan starvation in Gaza from Palestine Today. Look at the mass starvation!!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Z3B_OIqv0A0
Here is a Gaza family's blog about Ramadan. looks horrible.
http://ingaza.wordpress.com/2009/08/27/welcome-sit-down-share-our-meal-gaza-ramadan-day-6/
THIS is what real starvation looks like MJ.
http://darfurdyingforheroes.blogspot.com/
Israel has allowed 38,000 tons of aid into Gaza.
http://www.mfa.gov.il/MFA/Government/Communiques/2009/Humanitarian_aid_to_Gaza_following_6_month_calm.htm
There is no reason that Egypt could not allow aid in through its border as well.
Of course, Hamas then steals much of the aid meant for its own people. I guess Israel is responsible for that as well?
http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2009/feb/06/gaza-un-aid-hamas
It did have a perfectly open border with Egypt when Israel withdrew from Gaza, but like the 30 million dollar greenhouses the Israelis left the Gazans to feed themselves and were burned down, , the Gazans decided that firing missles into Israel would be a better response than taking advantage of their first open border. Israel finished the pullout on September 14 2005, 10 days later 30 rockets were fired on Israeli towns injuring 5 people.
20% of Manhattan residents made less than $8000 in 2008.http://www.gothamgazette.com/article/20030611/5/421 I wonder which highrises these people live in. Perhaps you are thinking of the urban nightmare that is inner city public high rise housing. Are these the people you think should move to a nice brownstone in Queens?Gazan's seem to be perfectly capable of leaving the city when they want.
http://electronicintifada.net/artman2/uploads/2/080630-gaza-beach.jpg
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/0/0c/Gaza_Beach.jpg
Of course you just ignore his point that CAIRO is more densly populated than Gaza and that there are 20 more densely populated cities in the world almost all of which are in the third world.
http://www.citymayors.com/statistics/largest-cities-density-125.html
Of course Israel wanted the PA to coordinate with them. What actually happened was that Israel wanted to withdraw and the Palestinians said that they would coordinate only if the withdrawl was part of a final status agreement. In other words, unless the withdrawl was part of a final status agreement the Palestinians were not going to coordinate.
September 25, 2009 6:20 PM | Reply | Permalink
Well, unlike Jeff, you at least provide us with the hasbara points he doesn't even bother with.
Nice try.
September 25, 2009 9:30 PM | Reply | Permalink
"Well, unlike Jeff, you at least provide us with the hasbara points he doesn't even bother with.
Nice try."
Pot...kettle.
September 26, 2009 2:20 PM | Reply | Permalink
Daily "israel is bad" post from MJ. Always comforting that in a changing world, some things remain constant.
September 25, 2009 10:43 PM | Reply | Permalink
It's not the density of the population of Gaza that matters--Manhattan, for example, is more densely populated. It is the truth of the statement that Gaza, today, is little more than an open-air prison.
September 25, 2009 11:58 PM | Reply | Permalink
It'd be a kick if the Jewish religion was right and all the Israelis had to go to their Yaweh and explain all this.
September 28, 2009 5:52 AM | Reply | Permalink