#like the only time i use the term is talking about actual jewish zionist thought im not gonna call random fucking jewish people that

[adlibitur]

i dont use the term "zionist" in general discussion because i can be precise and direct with my words without sounding like I'm quoting david duke actually, and its not that hard.

#im sorry but the fact yall will use these words while also not being able to tell if something is a david duke quote or not tells me all #most of you dont know what it means or use definitions created by outgroups or persecutors #its not that hard to use direct speech to address what you have issue with so you dont end up parroting the former kkk grand wizard #i do actually look down on people who use the term haphazardly and generally because you have become no different than david duke #i also think its incredibly interesting yall will define a jewish movement by outgroup definition but lose your goddamn mind if #say for example yall dont let christians define jihad but yet you do here? oooookay i see you #im not actually sorry for being able to avoid falling in to the mass hysteria directly segwaying you into neonazi ideology #like the only time i use the term is talking about actual jewish zionist thought im not gonna call random fucking jewish people that #and the fact yall do is a glaaaaaring red flag #the fact someone had the audacity to ask me why quoting david duke was a problem and that she should be allowed to for The Cause.... #no wonder jewish people are scared i am scared for them you all are too fucking stupid #thinking about the quote from the indigenous farmer who lives near my old home #'nothing more dangerous than a group of white people who think they have your best interests at heart' he said when people were demanding #that normies share war gore and he had to detail why thats actually the opposite of helpful for americans #these people dont want peace they want their idea of moral purity and at the cost of the people directly most affected

[jewish-sideblog]

"Both indigenous and colonizers" CAN PEOPLE STOP TALKING ABOUT SHIT THEY DON'T UNDERSTAND PLEASE

This wave of antisemitism and bullshit about "indigenous vs colonizer" makes me so scared as an indigenous person in the US of what will happen when Land Back movements do result in actual sovereignty restoration and then tribes do what people do and disagree over land and resources, like we were doing for thousands of years before Europeans arrived. Will we be reduced down to colonizers too??

It feels like Westerners, especially USAmericans, have such a black and white idea of what it means to be indigenous and what it means to be a colonizer/settler (because those terms are always conflated) and it makes me so angry and frustrated to see people apply those standards and lines thinking not just to complex sovereignty movements in their own countries but also to incredibly complex conflicts and wars happening on the other side of the world.

The damage I've seen done to sovereignty movements here in the US alone, people going around claiming that we want all "settlers" to go back to Europe or that we're going to start massacring people, has been horrible and the fact that it's all just to justify antisemitism makes me sick.

Genuinely. They're blocked now, but that same person said something to the effect of "Would an Iranian praying in a Mosque built on the ashes of a former synagogue be decolonization?"

And that was the point at which I was like. Ok. It seems like most people genuinely don't actually know what the terms "colonization", "colonizer" and "coloniality" mean. Obviously, that wouldn't be decolonization, because the Jews never colonized Iran. Emigration and colonization aren't the same fucking thing!

I used to have so much faith in my generation. I thought we were critical thinkers, capable of flexibility and engagement with new ideas. But I'm realizing now that we're basically just rebranded boomers. Back in the day, anybody you disagreed with was labelled as a "Communist". It didn't actually fucking matter if they were communist sympathizers, Soviet sympathizers, or even if they were remotely allied with socialist ideals. You could just call them a "Communist" and be done with it, without even understanding what that term means.

It's the same shit today. Instead of a HUAC witch hunt targeting communists, it's a social witch hunt targeting "colonizers" and "Zionists". I am terrified that the moment indigenous rights movements in the Americas and Oceania start making practical strides in Land Back, regaining rightful control over the ways your own land is used, you'll all be labelled as "colonizers" or "imperialists" or whatever the bad buzz word of the month turns out to be.

People simply can't wrap their heads around the idea that indigenous decolonization doesn't have the end goal of ethnically cleansing non-native people from the Americas. And it's because they're so absorbed in colonial thinking. They can't even fucking imagine what sovereignty could look like beyond an authoritarian structure based on control and violence. It's the same with Israel and Palestine-- they think that Jewish sovereignty must look like complete Jewish control to the detriment of Arabs, and they think Palestinian sovereignty must look like total Arab control to the detriment of Jews. The idea that a shared state or a two-state solution is "racist" stems from that false dichotomy.

Establishing an ideological binary of violence that pits "indigenous" against "colonizer", "native" against "settler", and "us" against "them" with no room for cooperation or collaboration is the core of colonialism. Because the core of colonialism is the idea that only one group can have true power at a time. And that's just not the way the world has to work.

[the1975attheirverybest]

Hi Hala! So, I know your opinion on matty not speaking up about Palestine but I was here thinking about it, follow my train of thought.

Considering everything he ver spoke, we know where he stands on this issue, right? So It's not that we want to know his opinion on this. We want him to speak because of the "signing towards utopia" thing.

But then we get to something he has already talked about his tweet about George Floyd, that is the dicotomy between long and short term expression (I don't remember the exact words). But he said he thinks It's better to speak through his songs, cause he actually work oh the lyrics, think deeply about the issue and can articulate his thoughts in a better way than in a tweet.

In fact, that was what happend when the whole bomb thing on People mv happend.

That being said, I don't know why but I think It's possible that he addresses this issue on a song for the next album.

Now, I don't agree with you on this matter for reasons that I don't think are important, but I wonder: if he really talks about it in a song, do you think It would be enough or anything he does from now on is already overdue?

Hey anon!

You can hear the gist of my take on the matter over here. It hasn’t changed recently. I suspect it won’t ever change. Barring some like exceptional circumstances.

I’ll address some of the points that you make here and iterate what I say above.

1. There is a difference between speaking out about every bill that is ever proposed to be made into law ever, and speaking out against genocide. Do you understand me?

Let me put it this way: let’s say Utah introduces a bill to ban even more books that show queer love stories. Or Alabama starts a debate about the age of consent. Or a school board in South Dakota has an initiative about critical race theory. I do NOT expect Matty to get onstage every single time that any of this happens and start yelling about it. He said something very poignant in the ION PACK pod. He said that artists used to be bohemian outsiders. Now everyone expects them to be liberal academics. And he’s just not the liberal academic type. I AGREE WITH HIM. TREMENDOUSLY. I don’t want him out there as a political pundit. I think punditry is one of the dumbest most self-absorbed jobs lmao.

HOWEVER genocide and ethnic cleansing is VERY different. It is a humanitarian crisis. One that demands all of us be accountable. Literal bloodlines have been wiped from the earth. The Palestinian ministry of health has had to delete family lineages from their database because Israel has killed them all. Like there is not a single person remotely related to them who’s been left alive. The family name is gone forever. Children are being starved. Tortured. Literal kids.

In my opinion, it’s not a valid argument to say that because he’s pro BLM then he’s obviously pro Palestine. If you talk to liberals, if you watch the news, if you speak to majority white communities, you’ll see a curious phenomenon. The most progressive of folks suddenly turns into a bloodthirsty animal horny for the destruction of Palestinians. This is due to 75+ years of propaganda by Zionists. Even the “good guys” are against Palestine because they genuinely believe we have to destroy Palestinians for the safety of everyone else (especially Jewish folks). Being pro-Palestine has gotten people fired from their jobs, black listed in hollywood, influencers have lost sponsorships, authors have been dropped by their publishers. This wouldn’t happen to anyone who says Black Lives Matter.

Moreover, regular methods of advocacy are not working for the same reasons. Biden and Congress folks are staunchly pro Israel. It’s the same in the UK, France, Germany. you’ve seen what has been happening to student protestors. Suspensions, expulsions, jail, physical injury.

If, at times like these, people who are of immense privilege, who claim to be brought up on punk values, who “make standing up for human rights as part of my schtick” are not only SILENT but say “really? You wanna hear me and Brittany broski on Israel-Palestine?” “I’m just a singer.” Then tell me what’s left?

2. How is saying “he spoke up once about one political issue years ago shouldn’t that be enough.” Any different from saying “Taylor swift spoke up about queer rights once when she was trying to sell an album. Therefore she’s a queer advocate”?

3. I can’t speak about the song hypothetical. In other words, I would have to see the song. My reaction would be different based on if it’s one line or a whole song and what the context and message etc. but I will say that he has already used Gaza in the show. The barrage of news stuff that plays before POTB. Where he has the clip of the lady saying “the woke left are angry with my favorite artist even though he’s on their side let’s talk about it” or whatever the fuck.

4. The right time to speak out was October 8. The second best time is now. Every day that goes by where he’s silent, more and more blood is shed. And it’s on his hands and his consciousness whether he wants to admit it or not.

5. Finally, I’m sorry, but it’s a tad disingenuous and bad faith of you to say you “disagree for reasons that aren’t important.” If you’re going to scrutinizes me for my words you should be willing to lay yours out first.

[morrigansmuses]

3 Golden Rules.

On Ethical disappointments. 

I was raised to be tolerant. To consider the views and opinions of others, to keep and open mind. I was a social outsider (homeschooled due to racism in the local school.) I vowed I wouldn’t ever exclude people for being different to me or having different values. I was desperate to make and keep friends. More than anything.

I was 15 in the late 1990s. Lonely as hell. I decided that I would befriend absolutely anyone who would have me. Essentially anyone who wouldn’t beat me up on sight for being foreign.

I decided that I had 3 and only 3 dealbreakers in terms of friendship.

RULE 1. They couldn’t be cruel to animals.

RULE 2. They coudn’t sexually abuse children.

RULE 3 They couldn’t be a card carrying Nazi.

If anyone in my life did any of those things I couldn’t associate with them anymore. But barring that I would try to accept them as individuals. 

Thats a pretty low bar right? I mean how could anyone fail to meet those insanely low standards?

See back then I didn’t know that shades of grey existed. I knew in theory that we were all imperfect beings, but I didn’t know what that meant yet in reality.

So I began to make friends. With normal kids. Actually probably nicer than average kids because they were sweet and sensitive enough to accept me for who I was when no one else would.

So the first hurdle I came across was that some of these people I was friends with enjoyed hunting. They would say for meat. I get that. Better than factory farming right? less cruel, less wasteful.

“You shouldn’t eat meat unless you’re willing to kill it yourself” They’d say virtuously.  

But then I saw them in action. Delighting in the act of killing in a way that I knew wasn’t healthy. Laughing at the kid goat’s head bursting in a shower of gore or the way an animal screamed upon being shot. Killing more than they needed… That’s an impulse I don’t believe humans should engender in themselves.

But it was for food. Right? So I overlooked it and silenced the voice in my heart.

One day my best friend shot a stray cat with his bb gun just for the laugh. It didn’t kill the cat or anything but the animal yelped and ran away. I was so upset and shocked that I burst into tears and it all came pouring out. Was he training himself to become a sociopath? I asked him.

He apologised. He never did anything like it again. He was very kind to animals, especially cats, ever since and doesn’t hunt them anymore for any reason.

I forgave.

That’s the first time I remember compromising a core value. It was like a tooth being pulled from my 15 year old head. 

I don’t regret it.

We’re still best friends. 

The second hurdle that started to crack my young heart was the undeniable fact that in the early 2000s almost every guy I knew in his early 20s had a girlfriend between that ages of 12 and 15. NEVER OLDER. I can’t stress this enough. They would vomit in disgust at the thought of a crone of 18 or 19. They were also VERY vocal about their desire and right to have sex with children after a few drinks. By the time I was 20 I knew I had aged out of the 20s dating pool. I wasn’t attracted to older men. 

No matter. I’m asexual and prefer platonic relationships anyway.

To this day I’ve never had a romantic relationship with a man. Because once I realised that Rule 2 wasn’t one any of them could keep, the trust was broken.

It wasn’t only men either. My closest girlfriend was a 26 year old substitute teacher who fucked one of her 15 year old students on a drunk night out once…

So they both had fun and boys that age are up for anything right? I mean. He probably still boasts about it today…

Right?

Plus… She was all I had. Like the only one I had at the time. I was so scared of losing her.

I turned a blind eye and ear. I tolerated. I didn’t have to approve of their teenage girlfriends did I? After all there were so many of them that if I cut them out of my life I’d have no friends ever again. Because the whole of society looked like them…

Thats the truth.

People in my extended family have dated 17 or 18 year old girls and encouraged them to drop out of school to have their children. People I love have done that.

I once knew a handsome, intelligent and charming man. He was dating a family member for a few months. He often defended the right of adult men to date teens. “Girls mature more quickly than boys.” He’d argue. Everyone would agree. After all hadn’t my great grandmother been 12 years old when she met my great grandfather and married him on her 16th birthday (with parental permission)? He was in his 20s. Just a boy himself surely? “We all know what children boys in their 20s are right?” Said my Mother… Whom I love very much.

Excuses were made.

Years later I discovered the the handsome, intelligent and charming man had been raping a 6 year old the entire time we’d known him. He is still wanted by the police today.

My father tells that when he was a boy of 18 back in the 70s he had kicked an older German man, a respected family friend, out of his car because the man had asked him to pull over, he had something important to tell him. When he did so, the man said that the Holocaust was a myth. An exaggeration, a Zionist hoax.

My Father was dating my mother at the time. She’s Jewish. So is his uncle, a Holocaust survivor.

He yelled at the man not to talk shit and made him walk home.

I am not my father.

The first time a Holocaust denier (a respected local businessman) voiced their opinion to me I froze. Then laughed. Surely he must be kidding... I argued briefly before realising that he’d made up his mind.

My well meaning people said I’d made a mistake. It was my job, they said, to change his mind. To educate him. Otherwise how would he learn?

I didn’t speak to him again but I still nod at him in the street because he employs a few of my friends and I wouldn’t want to make things awkward for them.

And also I don’t want him to yell at me. 

I have worked with Holocaust survivors and have survivors in my immediate family and I still nod in the street at a Holocaust Denier because we are raised to be polite aren’t we? Let’s not make a scene. 

We’re mature adults.

Aren’t we?

People are starting to turn weirder than they used to be. Politically.

My Leftist friends are in a secret facebook group... Strenuously defending China’s Uyghur genocide because Communism can do no wrong… And at the same time saying all the Israelis need to be killed for what they’ve done to the Palestinians. One suggests a biological weapon tailored to Jews.

My Centrist friends are suggesting we “Hang up democracy for a while” in order to combat global warming and welcome a global police state and stop “kicking off��� about our rights all the time. “Maybe we need a jackboot up the arse” one of them says.

And the ones that aren’t on the Left?

My facebook feed these days is getting awfully full of Rothschild memes.

“We own every bank in the world and funded both sides of every war since Waterloo.” They say, next to a grinning caricature of Jacob de Rothschild. Reminiscent of a Nazi cartoon of a “Rat Jew.”

Even a hedge fund billionaire prick doesn’t deserve that, does he?

I don’t comment. What’s the point? They’ve watched all the youtube and don’t read history books on principal.

My Brother is getting into Qanon. So is my Sister in Law.

She follows the medical teachings of a man who thinks the Jews invented Chemotherapy to kill the Germans after the war. Apparently he is becoming more and more popular.

Eccentrics.

Thats all.

I’m half Jewish. Like My Brother.

One of the Survivors I know said that 3 weeks after the Nazi propaganda came into the school he attended, he was in Bergen Belsen and half his family was dead.

His neighbour was jealous because his father had 2 more cows than he did.

I hear Marine Le Pen is neck and neck with Macron to win France.

A good friend of mine said it's because by 2030 Muslims will outnumber white people in Europe. He won’t read the articles I send him. But he sure sends me a lot of YouTubes.

I ignore them because I don’t want to hate him. Maybe he ignores my articles for the same reason.

Hey 15 year old me…. You, skinny thing with the ethics, the braces and black eyeliner…

Those compromises I made were made out of love... And also fear. 

Please stop looking at me like that little girl.

“It’s true” writes my friend. They’re trying to breed us out. It’s all an elite Zionist plot.”

I close Whatsapp.

Here I go again I guess…

#confessions #ethics #morality #standards #autobiography #adolecence #musings #writing #depressed #memories #friendship #bullying #Animal abuse #child abuse #nazism #racism #sociopathy #politics #anti semitism #mental health #1990s #facisim #leftist #centrism #uigharmuslims #china #authoritarian #hunting #democracy #israel

[schraubd]

Zioness Has Another Manifesto

Zioness, the progressive Zionist group, has released a new "activist's guide" on the issue of racial justice. It consists of:

One page on the need to overcome implicit bias;

One page on the need to "show up" for racial justice, even when one encounters antisemitism; and

Six pages on how to respond to antisemitic tropes (many, though not all, Israel- or Zionism-related) one might encounter while engaging in racial justice work.

This distribution of attention -- centering antisemitism in a pamphlet supposedly focused on racial justice -- has caused Zioness to be the target of numerous social media dunks. I think many of them are deserved, albeit with a few minor reservations. Here are my quick thoughts:

From its inception, my primary critique of Zioness -- and I've expressed this personally to their leadership -- is that they resolutely refuse to declare what progressive values demand with respect to Israel. Their justification for their reticence is that they are a domestic policy organization -- a response that is never going to sit well for a group called "Zioness". And documents like this only emphasize why this stance is untenable: Zioness can't forward opinions about Israel and then say "we don't take a position on that" when people ask them to register opinions on Israel. It's a circle they're never going to be able to square, and until they steel themselves and have the guts to forthrightly say "progressivism demands X, Y and Z out of Israel", people are going to going to be justified in looking at them with a skeptical eye.

It may be that a guidebook offering suggestions on how to respond to antisemitic tropes a progressive Jew may encounter while engaging in racial justice activism would be useful. But if you're going to make such a resource, don't title it "Racial Justice: An Activist's Guide". An activist's guide to racial justice should center questions of racial justice -- period. This is the locus of the criticisms Zioness is getting over this document, and it is absolutely correct. Creating a document on "racial justice" that has barely any direct discussion of racial justice is almost impossibly cringe-worthy.

Of course, the possibility that it might be useful to have a guidebook on how to respond to antisemitism while engaging in racial justice work also poses the question of whether now is the right moment to center that conversation. There is, shall we say, good reason to be skeptical on this front.

What little substance there is on racial justice is, to be generous, perfunctory. I'm probably more attached to implicit bias as a useful framing device for understanding contemporary racism than many of my colleagues in the progressive world (it's falling out of vogue), and even I'd say that talking about that alone is woefully incomplete. This is a case where something is worse than nothing -- if they hadn't made the limp gesture towards talking about racial justice qua racial justice, maybe it would have been clear that this document was meant to serve a different purpose (namely, "Responding to Antisemitic Tropes in Racial Justice Activism"). Of course, if that purpose had been made evident it would have more clearly posed the question of whether now was the right time to center that conversation. See the previous bullet point.

I've seen for awhile now the allegation that Zioness is an "astroturf" organization. There's virtually no evidence this is true. Moreover, anyone who knows anything about the constitution of American Jewish community politics should very well know it isn't true. Anyone with a modicum of knowledge about the politics of the American Jewish community -- and Zioness' critics certainly are included -- knows that there are a great many American Jews who (a) have relatively conventional "pro-Israel" politics, (b) have relatively conventional progressive domestic politics, and (c) feel aggrieved when they see these two commitments treated as antithetical to one another. Even if one hates that particular political cocktail, surely there's no dispute about its prevalence. Given that, there's no grounding to the idea that Zioness, which centers its appeal to just that political intersection, could only have sprung up via artificial seeding.* Since I'm confident that Zioness' critics are not ignorant about the political composition of the American Jewish community, I'm equally confident that their use of "astroturf" is entirely as a slur (meaning something like "activist group with more conventional and less radical politics than mine"), not an analytical category.

Many of the document's critics have cast it as specifically focused on "defending Israel" rather than addressing antisemitism more broadly. Much of the "antisemitic tropes" they address are Israel-related, but not several are not (ex: "Jews were behind the Atlantic Slave Trade" or "White nationalism isn’t about Jews"). There's something interesting about this, because formally speaking the elision isn't necessary: the locus of the critique -- that, especially right now, the centerpiece of a document on "racial justice" should be "racial justice" -- would I think carry equal punch if Zioness' document were accurately described as talking about antisemitism. So why fudge the description? The answer is that the criticizing "Israel talk" is more comfortable terrain for many compared to criticizing "Jewish talk", and so we see activists instinctively slide into the former even in cases where analytically they're just as much talking about the latter.

The tl;dr is that Zioness is a regular grassroots organization with a pretty obvious base of support, pairing conventional pro-Israel views with conventional mainstream Democratic domestic views. That, on its own, isn't too remarkable. But the document they've produced on "racial justice" is (a) justly being mocked for having a barely even perfunctory focus on racial justice; (b) bad on its own terms; (c) poorly timed with regard to its actual-albeit-understated purpose, and (d) inadvertently demonstrative of how Zioness' ostensible commitment to being a purely "domestic policy organization" that can't be expected to take positions on what progressive values mean for Israel is untenable.

* The closest evidence one has for Zioness being "astroturf" comes from its early funding from the right-wing Lawfare Project and Brooke Goldstein. That would raise legitimate flags, except that Goldstein has been extremely vocal about how much she hates Zioness precisely because they refused to take the pseudo-left concern-troll line that she had expected out of them (which is to say, they've actually been independent). The fallout has gotten so intense that Zioness has outright blocked Goldstein on Twitter. Whatever Goldstein's initial intentions, she'd be the first to agree that Zioness has charted its own path.

via The Debate Link https://ift.tt/2zqxT8V

#activism #Black #Israel #Jews #racism

[whiffling10]

hi maybe you could stop posting anti-semitic things and outright lies on gal gadot posts? it's really disgusting. thanks!

Hi,

I always hoped that this blog would be one of the less stressful areas of my life, and I can only imagine the horrors that this post will elicit - but here goes!

I am genuinely sorry if I have caused you or anyone else who identifies as Jewish to feel unsafe or demeaned by my post about how I was bothered by Wonder Woman’s use of an actress who is a former member of the IDF to criticize the colonization and ethnic cleansing of Native Americans by European settlers. What I know/understand about Gadot’s time in the IDF is more or less summarized here and here. I don’t believe that anything I said was a lie, but I apologize if I got something terribly wrong. I fully appreciate that people living in the United States, France and certain other countries are experiencing a wave of anti-semitic violence, vandalism and speech at every level of society and government, and I also understand that these experiences inform discussions about Israel and Zionism.

Grave indictments of the Israeli government land in many Western* ears as bigotry towards Jewish people. This is because the government of Israel and Zionist activists around the world (especially in the US) have worked strenuously to conflate Israel with Jewish people. The effectiveness of this effort is evidenced in the fact that charges of anti-semitism are the main mechanism by which those who do not value Palestinian lives are able to shut down conversations about the fact that the existence of Israel in its current incarnation as a Jewish state is predicated on the ethnic cleansing of Palestinians from their native land.

I could write a novel on this subject, but I encourage everyone to look into the much more thoughtful and comprehensive work, speeches and writings of Jewish anti-Zionist activists and groups (I’m not sure if all of these would actually self-describe as anti-Zionist) like Judith Butler, Israelis Against Home Demolitions,  Breaking the Silence, and Jewish Voice for Peace. To be clear: there is certainly anti-semitism at play in some European and American anti-Zionist activism. But just as there is no such thing as reverse racism, accusing Palestinians of anti-semitism when they criticize Israel, and Israelis is to fundamentally misunderstand the power relationship between the two.

If I had to guess, I would say that what lies at the heart of the widespread inability to understand anti-Zionism as separate from anti-semitism is a pair of truths that many** find very difficult to square with one another: The first is that Jewish people are a group with a horrific history and present of oppression in most of the world, including the Middle East.*** The second is that Jewish people are also, simultaneously, a majority group in Israel whose privilege in that country is the product of the brutal settler colonization and ethnic cleansing of Palestinian people and land in the name of a Jewish state.

I use these words - colonization and ethnic cleansing - very deliberately, and with the understanding that many people will become angry and defensive upon reading them. I use them because it would be a type of violence for me to sanitize what has happened and continues to happens to Palestinians at the hands of the Israeli government and those who support it. As you may have guessed, my family and I have been personally affected by this violence. And this brings me to my final point:

What troubles me about the knee-jerk cry of anti-semitism when I or someone else raises the issue of Palestinian oppression is that I do not feel or hear that these critics are at all horrified by violence done to Palestinian lives, bodies, society and land in the name of keeping Jewish people safe. Where are your tears for the Palestinian children who are arrested in pre-dawn raids to be sentenced in military courts without lawyers, shot in the face with “rubber bullets” that blow out their eyes or get lodged in their brains, or simply blown to smithereens in another “proportional response” to a homemade Hamas rocket that hit an empty Israeli barn? Where is your effort to educate yourself about the Palestinian refugees who, to this day, are literally stateless, unable to hold a real job or own property because they cannot access citizenship in any country?  Where is your rage over the fact that, after fleeing to Jordan during the 1948 war that established the state of Israel, my grandmother was not allowed to return home (literally stopped at the border by soldiers because of her ethnicity) and then had her land taken by the Israeli government because she had “abandoned” it? Where is your rage for the many thousands like her? Where is your disgust for the system of segregated roads in the West Bank? Where is your respect for the Palestinian struggle for basic dignities like freedom of movement?

Again, I am genuinely sorry if I have hurt you - you were not clear about whether you felt personally impacted by my post. I am committed to fighting anti-semitism in others and in myself, and I am also committed to honoring Palestinian lives and dignity. I do not believe those two goals are at odds with each other. I also do not have the energy for people who are unwilling to examine the ways in which their vigilant defense of Jewish people comes at the expense of Palestinians.

In this blog I focus on media and only very rarely on current events - but everything is political, and art is no exception. I will continue to write notes and posts about these issues where they intersect with the art that I consume. If that bothers you, PLEASE unfollow. If I do not respond to further notes or personal messages on this topic, please know that it is because this political issue is more personally painful and exhausting for me than any other, and not because I do not value or respect your opinion(s).

*A term with deeply racist and geographically inaccurate roots, but also one that is commonly understood and therefore useful.

**Americans in particular have a particular cultural conception of identity politics that is fairly one-dimensional and rarely contemplates how the power associated with a given identity marker can and does shift across geographic and political spaces.

***Another term with deeply racist and geographically inaccurate roots - but once again, it is extremely difficult to to eschew all Orientalist frameworks and terminology when talking about this part of the world in a concise format.

#replies

[abarahman-richard-chignell]

Nationalism...A Whole Lotta Nationalism!

Assalamu alaikum wa rahmatulahi wa barakatuh,   The original title was going to be "A revert's thoughts on the rise in Nationalism drawing on the Quran and Sunnah", but "a whole lotta nationalism" is appropriate given the rise of it everywhere and the length, I',m afraid, of this podcast! I normally try to avoid politics but in this day and age, it's almost impossible (Brexit, Trump, Saudi, China, to name just a few that seem to be all that is in the Western news). As always I want to try and tackle this in a way that is helpful to reverts or those rediscovering their Islam as this can be a rather difficult area to navigate as it involves it seems one has to question identities, nationalities, allegiances, religion, etc. It is rather a lot easier to understand if you are of Pakistani or Bengali heritage in the UK or Latino in the US, you've sadly experienced navigating this complex mix of where you fit in one way or another on a daily basis. If you are a refugee, life has always been hard, you never left your home just for a giggle, contrary to what it seems many people think you are not an expat who is just from a quote-unquote 'undesirable' country.  If you are from Palestine the struggle is in your blood. And of course this is just a snapshot of cases and far from fully inclusive. But of course, as a revert, you may be from none of the cultures under 'attack' you may even be from the culture or nation that is doing the attacking of your now new Brothers and Sisters. As a Brother from Britain or France, for example, you have the colonial legacy to deal with too. A Sister from the USA has the modern colonial warmongering of her own country to somehow come to terms with. As an Arab, you have the difficulty of leadership that never seem to represent the Islam that is everything to you, in a good light...I found and find this topic incredibly complicated and I hope that InshaAllah my thoughts and how I try to navigate this minefield may be of some value. Let me set the scene by giving some examples of rife nationalism and then tackle the Islamic view on this through some excerpts from the Qu'ran and hadith.  Although a warning ahead of time: my efforts to deal with this through an Islamic lens are going to be in no way exhaustive. Alhamdullilah this is simply because there are so many references that I could choose. Allah is the most Kareem (Kind) and his Messenger pbuh the best of examples - it should not surprise you that like most things - we've got this covered! DOCUMENTARIES I cut the cord to the TV ten plus years ago but still sometimes go down a YouTube rabbit hole now and then with my wife! We basically stick to lectures or documentaries in some pseudo attempt perhaps to be educated or intellectual ha ha. I am more than aware that our recent 'watchlist' is thanks to Google and whatever clever algorithm they have deployed to nicely serve up things for us to watch on a plate. Thank you YouTube algo-developers you clever little things! The 'freedom of choice' that we have online and the 'echo chamber'  effect is a whole other topic. I'm not going there today!!   Anyway recently we watched a series of interesting documentaries, from what I can remember, on VICE channel, Journeyman Productions, Ross Kemp on Gangs, BBC, Al Jazeera, etc I said it was a binge so let me share the ones I can remember:   Immigration - the harsh, fraught, struggle filled, emotional journeys of Syrians / Sub-Saharan Africans / Eritreans (the North Korea of Africa) / kind British people on the island of Lesbos / less kind Greek locals with a 'treat them mean and they won't continue to come' approach (as if that is going to do anything when they are willing to risk injury and death to leave where they are coming from) / unkind French and Italian police / kind local French people willing to go to court over providing refuge in their gardens to tens of refugees every day /  the disgraceful French police behaviour at the Calais Jungle camp. Israel, although we normally don't watch things on the Israeli occupation as my heart breaks at the barbaric nature of this ongoing apartheid and the international communities unwillingness to act on behalf of the Palestinian victims, we did watch an interesting thing on how the Haredi Jews have refused to serve in the Israeli military for religious reasons and yet how the Zionist government are not letting them get away with it. Now persecuting their own people for their religious beliefs which they are meant to share. As I'm an Englishman and we have a bit of a dark humour, I must confess to being amused by how un-Jewish the Zionist government are, and how if you are actually a practising Jew you are also borderline, or maybe not even borderline, an 'enemy of the state'! Also, I had no idea what a large number of practising Jews were opposed to military service.  A cursory bit of research highlighted that there are many other Jews like the Hasidic Jews who are against the occupation and service in the IDF.   We watched on Guantanamo Bay and how it is still open and on a 'tour' were quite amazed by how little the US soldiers guarding knew about their 'enemy' that they were holding. This is rather damning of the educational level and natural intellectual inquisitiveness. Even the base commander with rather a lot of stars on his shoulder confessed to knowing next to nothing! Quite staggering. Of course, the former guard who reverted to Islam featured in the documentary, mashaAllah, so it is wrong to totally generalise - we come to Islam in some very unexpected ways! Allahu Akhbar! We also watched Hate Thy Neighbour on the Deep South of America and the horrid EDL in the UK which was simply staggering for the total demonstration of ignorance and racism that are on both sides of the 'pond'. As an Englishman watching the EDL I just felt horribly ashamed. It is quite hard for me to fathom how this country can produce such disgusting characters from its midst.   A documentary on the most insane murder rate in Mexico border towns controlled by the cartels and how El Salvador is just so dangerous that those expelled from the US who have never really known El Salvador as home are willing to walk this 'caravan' that takes a minimum 30 days, and is truly treacherous, to try and get back into the US. Fully aware of the stakes involved if they are caught and that is if they beat the odds and even get anywhere near the border in the first place. We watched one on Afghanistan being, amongst a cornucopia of other natural resources, a gemstone capital. The one we watched focussed on emeralds and if you can afford them and want the greenest in the world then Afghanistan surely has them! This backed up what Afghan friends of mine had said about mineral resources in the country that I confess to never quite believing. It is amazing when you see for your own eyes that it rams home the point that you've been sold a dud by the media. It might even make one question the real motivations over the presence in a country that historically has been a graveyard for one army after another? Also, a debate hosted by intelligence squared and Chaired by Lyse Doucet (BBC's Chief International Correspondent) with the motion that "The West should cut ties with Saudi Arabia". For the motion were Mehdi Hassan (Journalist and Al Jazzera Broadcaster) and Madawi Al-Rasheed (LSE Professor and expert on Saudi Arabia). Against the motion Crispin Blunt (Conservative MP for Reigate - just up the road from me) and Mamoun Fandy (Egyptian born Middle East expert). It was a thoroughly good debate and well worth the watch. Before coming into the event 41% said they were for the motion, 22% against, 37% undecided. After the debate the positions had changed to 63% for the motion, only 5% were undecided, 32% were against. That was a swing of 6% towards the motion that "The West should cut ties with Saudi Arabia".  An obvious trigger and feature of this debate was the alleged but clearly fairly solid 'off with his head' order by MBS on journalist Jamal Khashoggi in the Saudi embassy in Istanbul. We also watched an interesting Oxford University Hard Talk on "What is the human cost to China's economic miracle?" again with Mehdi Hasan who this time was challenging Charles Liu on China's economic and human rights record - particularly on the Uighur Muslim detention or extermination depending on who you choose to believe.  Many are calling this ethnic cleansing and again it is happening pretty much undeterred. I forget where we watched it, but a just heartbreaking look at the humanitarian disaster that is Yemen, with a war that has been going on since 2015!  The civil war was ongoing but everything got significantly worse and became the worlds worst humanitarian crisis upon the involvement of the Saudi-led coalition. As in every war, civilians are bearing the brunt and suffering. Normally Scandinavia is portrayed as the lands where everything works, people are the happiest in the world, etc. Yet another documentary on the rise of Far Right parties puts pay to that notion - at least in my mind. In the sidebar, there were similar documentaries on neighbouring and regional countries. Sweden was even interesting and frightening in that there is a vicious battle between these right wing hate filled groups and militant violent left groups that actively combat the fascist right. All of this centred around the topics of nationalism, immigration, race, etc.   It is not just the algorithm served documentary binge fest where nationalist, separatist, racist, derogatoriness seems to be the global norm. The Christchurch terrorist act occurred and is obviously fresh in everyone's mind. As everyone knows this was nationalist, racist and hate inspired. I will not elaborate on that here. You may like to listen to my former podcast that covered the global Muslim reaction I experienced to this dreadful event, especially as it may not have been the reaction you may have expected (you can find it here). WHATSAPP Another example is from my own WhatsApp. I am a member of a number of Malaysian WhatsApp groups, after having lived there, and there is always a whole heap of Malay nationalism due to their concerns about the Chinese takeover of their country and the economic destruction that comes from not following Islamic economic principles at the state level. Post Christchurch I have received a troublesome number of links to mosques being vandalised in the north of England, we had Surrey Police talk in my local mosque and say that there had been a terrorist act against Muslims in normally sleepy Surrey. A 50-year-old man ranting about 'white supremacy' knifed a 16-year-old in a supermarket carpark..... and what is sad I am sure there are far more examples that someone with less aversion to media and social media could add to this already saddening list. The Today Show was shared with me where Muslim parents are upset about primary school sex and relationship education and Piers Morgan, taking on the mantle of a gay rights activist, decided to slander the Muslim journalist on his show, and Muslims in general, with an Islamaphobic and racist rant which was aired on an apparently well watched national TV channel. Although interesting the last 6 minutes or so were not featured online via the TV station where Piers steps a little too far over the line (the full version was sent to me). Piers, Piers, Piers, we are here to stay, when are you going to get that? Many of us are white like you mate. No, we're not going back to Islamabad, most of us never came from there, we're as British as you and have contributed more to building this society with real-world jobs than you. Wind your neck in mate. Accept that in a pluralistic society a favourite soundbite that you like to throw out, which is defined as: "A pluralistic society is a diverse one, where the people in it believe all kinds of different things and tolerate each other's beliefs even when they don't match their own.", you are going to have to accept that there are a whole bunch of us who face Mecca 5 times a day, wear different clothes, and rank God above all things. We accept you, time to actually be pluralistic and stop always targetting Muslims. That my friend is called Islamaphobia and you are only getting away with it because we don't seem quite as good as the Jews have been at getting it to be a term that people quake at being associated with, like anti-Semitism but.... we will get there soon inshaAllah, so watch out! NEWSPAPER Now I don't normally get a newspaper as I have a method that suffices my needs using my investment platforms excellent resources and I prefer books or periodicals for their deeper more thoughtful analysis. In general, I am not a fan of the 'news' per se. I know many successful people who seem to be just fine operating in a complete news blackout or reading headlines on the daily newspaper as they walk past a newsstand. However, after my family took my Dad out for lunch at the Shard last week I picked up an FT. I did it as a kind of walk down memory lane as I used to take the FT every day. As a finance chap, there really is no substitute. Now, this is not meant to be topical but rather an example of what is being pumped out and consumed. What I mean is that it is not specifically these stories that matter but rather the type of content I want to highlight. Scanning other newspapers in preparing a bit for this podcast, there is a commonality running through almost all UK publications - the examples I'm citing are indicative of the general state of affairs. I'm going to be referring to the Tuesday 19 March 2019 International Edition. Amidst the pages, on literally almost every page, what do you get but: Nationalism, Nationalism, Nationalism!   Also, I quite like the FT as they don't mess about! The news section is a few condensed pages before they get full-on business. So let me walk you through this sample Tuesday from our look-for-the-nationalist or leaning-that-way articles and references: 

- The front page headline has of course Brexit with "May's Brexit hits block as Bercow rules out third vote on same deal", naturally this sets the tone for a number of other articles where everyone guesses about the fiasco that has become the Brexit. The FT indicates what is coming in the rest of the paper on the front page. - Turning to page two, blissfully we get a pass.  - Page three has four articles all of which are loaded with nationalistic, and because this is Britain schoolboy antics of our esteemed politicians. The main article is "Bercow adds to May's problems while delighting Europhiles and Brexiters". The photo below showing Union Jacks and European flags jostling for our attention. As its a Brexit piece it is safe to say that this is nationalistic, them and us stuff. Then we have "Leavers will back PM's deal 'if she agrees to go'. In short, this is where conservative party members seem more interested in their positions in parliament than the future of the country. Pretty standard fare for politicians. We also have "Article 50 Back to Brussels with extra baggage" which is of course more of the same about poor old Theresa May having to go back and forth to Brussels to try and find some way out of this pickle we as a nation have got ourselves in. Finally, we have more of the games in the Conservative party with "Johnson and Raab jockey for position" which is all about how to slip into the PM spot as Theresa May leaves. Oh yes, it's not about serving the public interests first but rather serving their own. Loyalty to none it seems. Of course, cherrypicking some terms we have plenty of "leading Eurosceptic contenders", "prominent Brexiters", "insisting they are acting in the national interests", "hardline Brexiters", "pro-Brexit hardcore", etc, etc, yawn, yawn. - Page four we have a detour from Brexit woes for a little foray into Europe-land. "Staff resist Czech tycoon in battle for Le Monde"  is an article on a Czech billionaire looking to acquire control of the famous Le Monde newspaper. We have quotes like "I'm very suspicious of a foreign billionaire trying to get a foothold in the western establishment through the ownership of a media, especially through a newspaper such as Le Monde, which sets the tone and agenda of news in France and beyond". Yet we also have someone presumably talking on behalf of Kretinsky the billionaire saying "He is a Francophile and believes that France plays an important role in the fight of populism.". So here we have suspicion, foreign, western (making Czech back to the Eastern Bloc I presume), French nationalism in Le Monde as voice, Francophile, populism. Then it gets deeper as of course, we have "French interior minister in hot seat after yellow vest protest". This is more of the yellow vests protests that descended into violence with rioters setting fire to newsstands, a bank, restaurants and ransacking more than 90 shops. Sadly also for this chap they report on his playing around with waitresses rather than his wife. Who only knows what this movement is about anymore. It may not be so nationalistic but it is certainly popular and violent. And of course the French are often quick to say that everywhere immigrants come from are uncivilised and yet here we have France regularly looking like a war zone. - Page five, oh dear me, we have "Brazil's Trump pivots towards US in boost for White House", with subtitle "Rightwing Bolsonaro's Washington visit brings hope on both sides of closer ties". I can probably rest my case here but there are two disturbing quotes I will site to ram home the point: Firstly: "Day's before Jair Bolsonaro's meeting with Donald Trump this week, a select group of enthusiasts gathered at the Trump International Hotel in Washington to celebrate the ideas that helped bring the two rightwing populist leaders to power.Eduardo Bolsonaro, son of the Brazilian president who won a landslide election in October, was there. So too, as co-host of the event, was Steve Bannon, the former White House strategist who has set up a club for nationalist populist leaders called The Movement. "This is a very important movement and not just for Brazilian-US relations.... but the world," Mr Bannon told the gathering. "Ideas have consequences, and with the arrival of Bolsonaro [in Brazil], Trump [in the US], Orban [in Hungary], and Salvini [in Italy], it's a critically important time."We're at last doing what communists and socialists did a long time ago," added Eduardo Bolsonaro, who is also head of Brazil's congressional foreign relations committee. "We're organising ourselves internationally". All I will say personally is that I find this level of organisation globally of Nationalist leaders, the language used, and the titling of their club as The Movement, simply terrifying. - Page 6 and I promise we're done, inshaAllah, but there are a couple of things here which are both nationalistic and divisive. I have to make a little detour here. The first is "Erdogan angers Wellington by airing video" where we find out the Mr Erdogan screens footage of the mosque killings during his election rallies. It seems whilst everyone else is noting how well the NZ Primeminister has dealt with the whole affair Erdogan is trying to garner voters that he is struggling to hold onto. Now I am not sure who his advisors are but even my local Imam preached to the community not to share the videos due to the hurt it would cause the victims families, the disrespect to the martyrs, and the fact that it aids the intention of the killer himself. Oh no it seems Erdogan went and dove in with both feet the videos even being captioned "A terrorist who is the enemy of Islam and the Turks". In the rallies, Erdogan said 'the "real target" of the New Zealand killings was the Turkish people, the Turkish flag and the Turkish state.' Do we need to remind Mr Erdogan that whilst he might be struggling for votes that Islam, Muslim and Turk are not synonyms. But, without going too deep into this from the Islamic perspective, we have again(!) another example of rife nationalism. Next, we have "China talks up close ties with EU in riposte to 'systemic rival' label" and language like "concerns Beijing is trying to divide the bloc", China being an "economic competitor" and "systematic rival". China's representative making a big thing of "co-operation is a mainstay of European relations". The whole thing, of course, suggests discomfort from both sides with Europe marking their turf and China doing the same. I am going to finish with the headline "Beijing attempts to justify Uighur detention". As we all know by now Human Rights groups, international concern, yet not enough governments speaking out about the atrocious, ethnic cleansing, abuse, forced marriage, forced consumption of pork and alcohol, all in the name of education, oh and torture, murder, etc,  treatment of the Uighur people in China. Here we have Erdogan reclaiming some class by being the "first leading Muslim-majority country to call on China to close its mass internment camps holding Uighurs." Of course, I don't have to work hard to convince you that this is nationalistic, ethnic, racist, behaviour at play. I do have to say one thing.... you know you have that one friend or family member who is prone to massive exaggeration. Well, it seems China's state council has a serious case of exageritis! Let me read you this quote "Xinjiang has destroyed 1,588 terrorist groups, arrested 12,995 terrorists" and it goes on. But really? Really? 1,588 terrorist groups. 1,588 terrorist groups inside Xinjiang province. I spat my tea out reading that! Come on China state council pull the other one! I think you need to double down on your editorial control to ensure that the 'stats'  you produce have at least some basis in reality. WRAP UP THROUGH THE LENSE OF ISLAM Ok, ok, no I haven't turned this into a news review podcast but what I do hope I have done is demonstrated how everywhere you look there is the talk of nationalism or conditions that trigger nationalistic feelings. There are whole regions in flux and mobile populations at unprecedented scales. I want to say unprecedented but I'm not a good enough historian to know if that is totally true. What is for sure is that there is a significant amount of population movement and a significant amount of nationalism. What I'd like to do now is address nationalism through the eyes of Islam and my views as to how we as Muslims are meant to actually tackle this specific issue of nationalism. I'll start with making the point that Muslims living in non-Muslim majority countries can have issues that are kind of hard for them to deal with although I emphasise they have to rely on the religious teachings of our Deen (religion). Let's note the ease with which Muslims can feel awkward in Western countries with things that are nowhere near in line with our Religious views e.g. homosexuality, sex education at increasingly younger and younger ages, public debauchery, the promotion of gambling, sexualisation of almost everything, diminishing moral standards, etc, etc. Regrettably, the list is quite long. As this warrants a whole other podcast in its own right I am going to cover this in as short and sharp a practical manner as I can without giving any specific scriptural references, I'll save that for the full podcast inshaAllah. The key point: Muslims as long as able to practice their religion have to respect and uphold the laws of the land. After having travelled in many Muslim countries, you will find that many in those lands are jealous of the law and order in the West. There is no perfect Islamic environment in the world. We have to simply make do with what we have and in the West you are really rather blessed, whether you know that or not. Just wise up and be pragmatic. Thank God that you can freely worship, that you can listen to khutba's (sermons) that are not written by the state, that you can homeschool your children if you don't like the state education, that there is good state education at all, that there is access to medical care - which is often free, the rule of law is more balanced, bribery is not rife, etc. My suggestion is don't be a complainy-pants. Don't focus on the few things that are less pleasing and overlook much that is good. We should have shukr gratitude, for the blessings Allah swt has bestowed on us and sabr for those things he has also bestowed upon us that we find hard. As Muslims, remember we are people of shukr and sabr. So what do you do my brothers and sisters about things you are uncomfortable with, like homosexuality? Well how about this? Don't go to any gay bars!! What if you meet someone 'strange' or 'odd'? Be kind and well mannered. You never know if you may be an instrument of Allah swt and a trigger for them looking to Islam. There is no compulsion in religion and we are all the creation of Allah swt after all. A simple heuristic is to worry more about yourself, then your family, then your community, and work your way up. I am sure there are more than enough things for you to work on in those first three areas before being outraged by fringe groups. Even if they are rather vocal considering their meagre numbers.   Back to Nationalism. Look I checked my logic on this whole topic of Nationalism and being a Muslim with one of my close Arabic Brothers who has memorised the Quran mashaAllah. I also asked him for verses that he thought were relevant. There are honestly so many on this topic and additionally many many Hadith. I messaged him the following: "I would like to write something on nationalism and its dangers. It will be along the line of what I believe is stated in the Quran and the Sunnah: that we are Muslim first and from a nation second. That cultural things from our national traditions are cool as long as they don't contradict explicitly something from the Qu'ran and the Sunnah. This is my logical understanding so far." My Brothers response was "I stand with you for this Brother, flags and colours should not take us away from each other, we are being called by Allah swt as "one Ummah" and the only differences between us are in Taqwa which no one can judge except He." Note the key points here. 1) we are an ummah before we are nations with flags, colours, etc, (2) our unity as brothers and sisters in Islam supersedes our allegiances to nation states, (3) in the eyes of Allah swt we are all the same except in our taqwa. Taqwa if you have not heard of it before is our God consiciousness or you can have it translated as fear of Allah swt. It is what makes us do acts in remembrance of Allah swt. This can only be judged by Him the Most Magnificent as He is the only one who can look into the hearts to see this taqwa. None of us mere mortals possibly can. Actually, there is another area I want to share in my communication with my Brother that I think is important to reflect on as Muslims. I laughed with my wife that it is so amazing that I can just ask him for references and he closes his eyes and can just pull relevant verses from the Quran database that is his brain. What an incredible blessing that is from Allah swt and for someone who didn't grow up with any knowledge that people have memorised God's word in its entirety with no errors I continue to be astounded when I see this. I told him we thought this and he laughed. He said "Alhamdullilah Brother, when someone says this to me I really would say as Prophet Suleiman (Solomon) said in the Quran 27:19 "... "My Lord, enable me to be grateful for Your favour which You have bestowed upon me and upon my parents and to do righteousness of which You approve. And admit me by Your mercy into [the ranks of] Your righteous servants" Alhamdullilah" Then he tells me "you should teach your kids Arabic Brother, they will be grateful to you afterwards, they will appreciate how much you really love them especially when they read the Quran and understand it the way it was revealed" Then he said: "Walahi Brother, Quran is the only guidance in my life, and without it, I am completely NOTHING. It is my soul's oxygen! and every Muslim's too (supposedly)!" I share this as I feel it imperative to ask anyone still listening or reading: is this how you feel about the Quran? Is this your relationship with it? Is it your oxygen? Are you nothing without it?   It is meant to be! This is what creates our unity, creates our understanding, means that when there are issues like nationalism we know 100% where we stand as Muslims. We know that we're united with every single other Muslim on the Straight Path as we all go our understanding from Allah swt's direct words to us in the Holy Quran as well as the example and explanation of those words from the Prophet pbuh and what we have learnt from the Sahaba (may Allah be pleased with them), and the great scholars who have helped ensure in these modern times we understand as we were meant to the way to live. May Allah swt enable us as an Ummah to reconnect with Him through His Words and may we have the Qu'ran such a part of our life that it testifies on our behalf in the hereafter. Ameen. So here are a few quotes from the Qu'ran:    21:92-93 *"[Prophets], this is your community, one community, and I am your Lord, so serve Me. They have torn their unity apart, but they will all return to us."* 23:52-53 *"This is your community, one community - and I am your Lord: be mindful of Me - but they have split their community into sects, each rejoicing in their own." *   In both of these the emphasis, the angle that is being stated if you like, is referring to us as a community which is understood as an Ummah-nation. A community united by shared beliefs. One where our religion is the unifier, that is what makes us a nation, we are not separate from any other Brother or Sister, we are united as an Ummah through our religion, through the Lord we worship, the Lord we fear, and the Prophet pbuh who's example we follow. Allah swt reminds us of the risks of division and how we will all ultimately return to Him. He swt also highlights at the end of the second verse how the Jews and the Christians split into sects "each rejoicing in their own". Here the Quran is warning Prophet Muhammad pbuh and us that we are meant to be united as an Ummah, as a community, and not divide up into groups, making the errors of the former peoples of the book. Do you see how this trumps all human constructs of nations or nation-states? How it runs so much deeper? *3:102-103 *"You who believe, be mindful of God, as is His due, and make sure you devote yourselves to Him, to your dying moment. Hold fast to God's rope all together; do not split into factions. Remember God's favour to you: you were enemies and then He brought your hearts together and you became brothers by His grace: you were about to fall into a pit of Fire and He saved you from it. In this way God makes his revelations clear to you so that you may be rightly guided." * This is massive! We were enemies, and He brought our hearts together, through the religion, and His favour and we became brothers. Allah swt tells us that this saves us from the pit of the Fire. He swt tells us that we must "hold fast to God's rope all together".  So why are we fighting, killing, making enemies of other Muslims, fighting as nations against other nations, when that favour of Allah swt and brotherhood in religion that he has given us is what keeps us from the fire? *3:104 "Be a community that calls for what is good, urges what is right, and forbids what is wrong: those who do this are the successful ones."* As is the case throughout the Quran Allah swt tells us what makes us "the successful ones" and it as a community - a global ummah again - calling for what is good and forbidding what it is wrong. Calling to good is about as expansive as it gets. Are nationalistic motivations, the superiority of one type over the other, calling for good? Is this treating our brothers as we would hope to be treated? A community is stated here, not multiple nations. A community of believers where collectively, we focus on good. United we are successful as a single global community. I see this as knowing that deeper than the human constructs of nation-states there is a bond between me and my Moroccan brother, or between me and my Yemeni brother, or between me and my Colombian brother, or any other brother you can think of.... that transcends that nation-state man-made construct.   *3:105 "Do not be like those who, after they have been given clear revelation, split into factions and fall into disputes: a terrible punishment awaits such people."* This should make us think, should it not? Are we going down the route of those in the past who became divided? Have we not been given clear revelation? Have we not witnessed the mess that has become of those who have split into so many factions they lost all unity and are clearly in confusion? Do we no longer fear the punishment of Allah? Allahu Akhbar! La illah ill Allah. We hear and we obey! Or at least we should be unified by that La illah ill Allah. There is a community or a nation but its the community or nation that unites across all languages, races, and types under the shahada: La illah ill Allah, Muhammad rassululah.   THIS TOPIC REQUIRES MORE I actually got into this topic without thinking it through fully! I realise that I have only really scratched the surface of what needs to be said on this matter. For example, I need to address the race and racism part. How the inclusiveness of Islam is one of the biggest draws and how the Quran and indeed the Prophet pbuh's last sermon covered how we are all the same no matter our skin colour or where we happen to have been born. Maybe even more so than this is the importance of highlighting the importance of brotherhood and sisterhood as a broad concept in Islam and how this adds to the trumping of nationalism. However, this is already exceptionally long and so I guess I shall inshaAllah break this topic up and cover these in future podcasts. InshaAllah I also didn't lose everyone with the length of this one, in what seems to be, unintentionally, my first long-form podcast. CONCLUSION To wrap up I hope that I have made a clear case that as Muslims we must be very careful around nationalism and tribalism. We are Muslim first and of our countries second. Or maybe even deeper we are of the human community first and foremost, as all are created by Allah swt irrespective of belief. Then as Muslims, we believe in Allah swt and we happen to live in a particular nation, for what is ultimately a very short period. The purpose of this residence being to work so that we get where we so desperately hope to in the hereafter which is eternal. Furthermore, I hope that, although I didn't drum it home so much that, as long as we are able to practice our religion we are bound by the laws of the lands we reside in. This can raise emotions that can be difficult to deal with but we must be patient (have sabr) as well as being grateful (having shukr) for all those things we are blessed with. I've lived in different European countries most of my life and then in Muslim countries. I have good friends and business interests in many different countries and I can categorically tell you that even if things look 'idyllic' somewhere else - they aren't. Remember this is the dunya - you want idyllic? - work for it through your worship and remembrance of Allah swt. May Allah swt draw us together as Muslims, enable us to be the best of examples and the ones no one fears, may we not harm our brothers and sisters in any way and may our leaders lead with wisdom and mercy for all humankind. Ameen.

[the-record-columns]

March 13, 2019: Columns

The truth always fits...

By KEN WELBORN

Record Publisher

I have been accused of many things in my life—many of which are true—including driving way too fast sometimes.

However, a far older and slower Ken is now criticized for the exact opposite fault—driving too slowly, much to the dismay of other drivers who have spoken volumes to me with their middle fingers.

However, one of my favorite stories is about a speeding ticket and my trip to court with my daddy, the preacher, C. S. Welborn.

It was in the late 80’s, and as I was traveling on U.S. 421 North in Yadkin County one day. I was running very late and desperately trying to make up lost time.  And, yes, I got pulled by a N.C. State Trooper who announced to me that it took several miles to catch me because I was going so fast. 

When I asked just how fast, he said I was clocked at over 80 mph when I went by him and he thought I had sped up after that.  I explained my predicament of being late and asked that, if he was going to write me a ticket, would he do so quickly.  He assured me a ticket was forthcoming and returned forthwith with a bit of a charitable tone, writing me up for only 79 mph in a 55 mph zone.  I was still heartsick—my license was going to be gone.

On court day, I took my dad with me to drive me home if I had to surrender my driver’s license on the spot.  In Yadkin County Court that day, I had lots of company and Judge Samuel Osborne had heard a ton of (very lame) excuses, none of which seemed to matter to him that day.

"Guilty."

"Guilty."

"Guilty."

They were dropping like flies, and then it was my turn.

"How do you plead?" I was asked. 

"No contest." I replied. 

"Wait a minute," Judge Osborne said, peering over his glasses. "Mr. Welborn, do you mean to tell this court that you were speeding?" 

I nodded yes, afraid to speak.

Judge Osborne continued, "...have you noticed that you are the only one here today who was actually speeding?"

I just stood there.

The trooper told the judge I had not been a problem, and when asked what I had to say for myself, he told the judge, "He said he was in a hurry."

Folks laughed until the judge glared down at them.

"Mr. Welborn, you haven't had any other tickets recently, have you?"

"Well yes, I got one 65 in a 55 and another 55 in a 45."

I had started feeling a bit better until I had to admit to the other two tickets, and the courtroom remained quiet for what seemed like an eternity. It was probably only about two minutes.

"So you were speeding, huh?" 

I again nodded.

Judge Osborne then went on to say, "Mr. Welborn, this court appreciates hour honesty. You are hereby convicted of running 65 in a 55 zone, go downstairs and pay a $15 fine and court costs. You can keep your driver's license."

    I even got the girl in the Clerk's office to take an out-of-town check—it was truly my day.

   But, best of all, my daddy was beaming.  On the way home he must have said a half-dozen times, "Son, I've always told you that honesty is the best policy."

    As ever, Pa was right.

  Obscure Diagnosis

By EARL COX

Special to The Record

Yes, we’re in flu season but that’s not the sort of disease to which I’m referring.  What I’m talking about is immune to any sort of preventive measures and has survived for thousands of years.  Antisemitism, the irrational hatred of the Jews, is a rising epidemic which is spreading around the world.

In Europe, the word “Jew” is used as a curse word.  Antisemitism in France has increased by 74% in the past year and just a few days ago at a carnival parade in Belgium, one of the floats depicted two giant Orthodox Jewish figures sitting on bags of money with two mice on their shoulders.  In the U.S. and around the world, there is an unprecedented rise in hate crimes directed at Jews. According to a recent Gallup World Affairs survey, in the United States support for Israel among liberal Democrats is at its lowest level of only 43%.  There is a fine line between what constitutes antisemitic speech and mere criticism of Israel.  Rep. Ilhan Omar, a Minnesota Democrat and one of two newly elected Muslim women to the U.S. Congress, recently made statements that equated support for Israel to having a traitorous-like allegiance to a foreign country (as though one cannot be both pro-Israel and a patriotic American at the same).  America and Israel have always had a close relationship based on our shared Judeo-Christian values – something the three newly elected congresswomen, among other Democrats, would like to change.  What Omar is attempting to do is form an idea in the minds of those who buy into her rhetoric that it is treasonous to be an American Zionist.  Very few people are aware of what the “cursed” Jews have contributed to America’s founding and continue to contribute today to making the world a better place.  A history lesson is in order here. 

Our sweet land of liberty owes a debt of gratitude to a little known and unsung Jewish hero named Haym Salomon.  Just what did he do that was so special that the U.S. Postal Service issued a commemorative stamp in his honor?  Almost singlehandedly, Haym Salomon gave the financial resources needed to finance the American Revolution and keep our new nation afloat.  In today’s dollars he gave the equivalent of tens of millions of dollars to the government which, at the time, did not have any power of taxation.   Born in Poland, this 32 year old Jewish immigrant landed in New  York in 1772 where he quickly set up shop as a merchant and trader in foreign securities.  George Washington was counted among his friends. In addition to financing the American Revolution, Salomon gave loans to many of our founding fathers to include Thomas Jefferson, James Monroe, James Madison and other prominent statesmen.  Some historical accounts say he charged no interest on these loans while others say he charged interest well below the market rate at that time. Haym Salomon knew what it was like to be at the top of the mountain as well as at the bottom.  At one point the British confiscated all of his property and forced him to flee penniless.  Nevertheless, he recovered and went on to help lay the financial foundation upon which Robert Morris, under the direction of Congress in 1781, established the Bank of North America.  Salomon recruited other financiers to support the bank, he located purchasers for “government bills of exchange” which are similar to today’s Treasury Notes, and who even loaned their own money to the government.   Jewish businessman Haym Salomon helped equip America’s soldiers and gave generously to military regimens.  He was never repaid the money he loaned to the government thus when he died in 1785, he was impoverished leaving his wife and four children with overwhelming debt.  Shortly before his passing, Mr. Salomon was responsible for having a “religious oath test” removed from the Pennsylvania state constitution which paved the way for non-Christians to hold public office.  I sincerely doubt our newly elected Muslim Congresswomen know this obscure fact of American history – that they owe their positions within the government of the United  States to a JEW who was willing to take risks for the building of a nation which valued life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness. Not only do we owe a debt of gratitude to this marvelous Jewish patriot for his vital contribution in the founding and funding of our great nation, but we continue to owe the Jews a debt of gratitude for their many contributions today in science, technology, medicine and agriculture, making the world a better, safer and healthier place for us all.  

   A Ruby Moment

By CARL WHITE

Life in the Carolinas

Good stories have a way of evolving and often lead to more good stories and that what happened this week.

We had just wrapped up a TV segment on 6th and Main Restaurant in North Wilkesboro. In addition to learning about the great food, we learned about the journey of the current owners, Jimmy and Heather Forester. We also learned about the house that was built in 1903.

It’s a colorful story that over the years has touched countless people. The house was first home to a dentist and then later was home to Richard Tipton “Tip” McNeill, his wife, Glady, and their children. McNeill was a co-owner of the local Coca-Cola Bottling company. He also served multiple terms as the mayor of North Wilkesboro.

As time passed, the McNeill family took in borders that stayed upstairs and this apparently planted a seed that would inspire the next owners.

Henry and Queenie Douglas would open the Douglas Inn that would be home to many over the years.

While doing research for the segment, I talked with John Kilby, Sr. with Yadkin Valley Ford, which is the current oldest continuously in-operation Ford dealership in North Carolina.  John shared with me that his mother was born at the Douglas Inn and so was his mother’s sister and their crib was a drawer.

John was gracious and agreed to be part of the segment open by driving me to 6th and Main in one of his great vintage cars. We waited for a sunny day and John did not disappoint.

The Douglas Inn would close in the 80’s.

Steve and Melody Critz would be the next owners. I visited with Steve, who is now living in Statesville. He shared the story of the work and time required to update and bring the house to life as the “Greetings from the Heart” gift shop and “The Tea Room.” Steve had saved a box of pictures from that time which included before, during and after construction. These pictures were valuable in our segment production.

In the box, he also had pictures of Pat McNeill Day, who was the daughter of Richard Tipton McNeill. In one photograph, he was sitting on the porch steps holding baby Pat. He also had a photograph of Pat enjoying “The Tea Room” many years later.  

While Steve loved the people, the time required to run a gift shop and restaurant was not to be a long-term endeavor.

It would next transform into “The Old Wilkes Plantation” which was operated by Fred and Peggy Bumgarner.

After five years, the house would again welcome new owners. Skip Phillips with Shirley Faw brought a new look and feel to the building as 6th and Main was introduced to the world.

Current owner, and Skip’s niece, Heather worked at the restaurant from the start. As time passed, one day Skip and Heather had a conversation which would lead to the eventual transition of new ownership of 6th and Main. Heather and Jimmy Forester became the new owners. They made a few changes including expanding catering services, and while they are always busy, they love the food business and love the people they serve.

They even have a cool ghost story.

And then, I visited with Ruby Felts Pennington and her daughter, Vivian. Conversations with Ruby are always gentle and kind. We talked about all sorts of things. She shared with me how she would be moving to an assisted living facility and how she was looking forward to making new friends. I told her about the 6th and Main story that we just wrapped up.

Not long after our visit, Vivian called and said that Ruby ask her to drive by 6th and Main. Well, as it turns out she actual lived at the Douglas Inn for one year! The year was 1947, Ruby was 16 and she worked at Cress Five and Dime. The room and board were $6 a week.

One day she was working on the window display and a recently discharged Navy man, John Ralph Pennington, came walking down the street. They made eye contact and Ruby told me he said, “Hello good looking.”

Even after all these years, I could still hear the excitement in her voice. Ruby was smitten and before long she had herself a Navy man who was also a bluegrass musician.

He was part of a group that played live on local WKBC Radio. Rudy and her friends would go to the radio station and watch them sing.

Ruby and Ralph would get married and have many wonderful years together. If she had not been staying at the Douglas Inn and working at the Cress, would they have met?

One house built in 1903 has nurtured families, provided shelter, nourishment, entertainment and celebrations for who knows how many!

That’s one heck of a house if you ask me…

  Carl White is the Executive Producer and Host of the award-winning syndicated TV show Carl White’s Life In The Carolinas. The weekly show is now in its 10th year of syndication and can be seen in the Charlotte market on WJZY Fox 46 Saturday’s at noon and My 12. The show also streams on Amazon Prime. For more information visit www.lifeinthecarolinas.com. You can email Carl at [email protected].

[ilyashrayber]

North Beach

 There has to be something in the air. There has to be something that is telling you that this cannot be real, that this is a dream, that deep down it could not be true. I am not describing sex, or landing a career, or even watching Star Wars for the first time. I am instead trying to convey to you the emotion I have everytime I get to walk through North Beach, a neighborhood situated in the northeastern corner of the city. I think I stumbled upon it by accident, probably lost sometime in middle school, sweating bullets that I was never going to find the 38, and subsequently, never make it home. Even in that instance, I still had a vague grasp on just how freaking cool this place was.

   It was only last year that I set off on a (very) poorly planned Europe trip for almost a month. With my best friend in tow, we left America, not knowing just how many shenanigans we would get into while abroad. Europe was amazing, as we went from the narrow alleyways of Paris, sipping fine red wine, to flying by the Swedish countryside on scooters, to discussing socialism while haggling with Danish locals, all the way to (almost) getting locked overnight in a Czech cathedral. It was a paradise, in short. But, for some reason or other, we never made it to Italy. Which is strange, because in all facets of my life, especially those in which I devour art, it seemed like I was skewing more and more towards Italy in terms of interest. My favorite films recently seemed to all stem from minds such as Fellini, Petri, and Pasolini. My taste in music had seen the same shift- I traded in loop pedals and washed out guitar riffs for old school organs and synthesizers. In place of Radiohead, Mitski, and The Strokes, I was now enamored with artists such as Piero Umiliani, Stelvio Cipriani, and Armando Trovajoli, all 70’s lounge legends. They made me feel like my life was one big screening of La Dolce Vita. I knew that my dream car, even though I only have my permit as of writing, had to be made by Fiat or Alfa Romeo in the 70’s. And don’t even get me started on the tailoring of houses like Brioni and Loro Piana. So why didn’t we go to Italy? Well, I guess that’s because I’ve had North Beach my whole life.

    I did not grow up in North Beach, and I certainly didn’t know anyone who did when I was younger. It was just a true coincidence that I found myself stumbling among it’s streets one day, blown away by where I was. Just like any neighborhood, it had its own air, it’s own smells, and most of all, it’s own vibe. (Cue the real estate developers.) For a while, North Beach was my little slice of Europe. It felt like a vacation every time I went there, since I lived about an hour away by bus. San Francisco is small for a city, which is why I’ve never thought about it that way. North Beach especially hammers that notion home. The thin alleyways, confusing dead ends, and surprising number of parks located there almost make you feel like you’re in a West Coast version of Call Me By Your Name, except instead of Armie Hammer in a speedo, you have a guy named Derek in a patagonia vest. (The swathes of tech workers have spread to every inch of town, and don’t let anyone tell you different.) Still, you can’t shake the feeling that you’re in a special, almost sacred place. It is not like any other, with the smell of focaccia lingering, mixing in with the scent of less than stellar cigarettes, usually from the same bakery. Is it touristy? Yes. Do I care? Not really. After a while, you just learn to tune them out. Instead, you take note of the old men yelling at each other in front of coffee shops, the beautiful array of pastries in every window, and maybe, if you’re lucky, the people at Z. Chiocolotto’s letting you get two free taffy samples instead of just one. These are all facets of this beautiful, vibrant neighborhood. And now, onto some memories.

   It was my senior year of high school, and me and one my best friends were talking about prom, happening later that weekend. I had called the girl I was supposed to go with around 4 or 5 times, anxious that she was going to cancel. Why? Because I was in high school, and that’s how my brain works. Little did I know she was celebrating shabbat with her family and had turned her phone off that night. So, in the midst of my nerves and anxiety, a friend and I went over to get a slice, calm myself , and discuss how we were going to ‘make a move’ this weekend. We went over to Tony’s off Columbus, and got mouth blasted by the best damn pizza I’ve ever eaten. They do calzones there too, but don’t bother with those. Tony’s is probably the only place I’ve ever heard of that has a slicehouse with an actual school for making pizza above it. Internationally recognized and accredited, of course. But again, ignore the calzones. Anything but a slice with pepperoni, or just cheese if you're a veggieboi, seems like sacrilege. We took our slices up to the highest hill in North Beach and looked down on the rest of the city. It was beautiful, with the fog rolling in to make it a classic San Francisco night, along with the ocean breeze coming from a nearby Pacific Ocean. Of course, as picturesque as it sounds, we kept it casual, sitting on the curb of the street, eating pizza, trying not to get hit by some out of townie driving an Uber, happy to just be alive. We began discussing the future. Would we get laid at prom? Eh, probably not. Would we have fun either way? Well, hopefully. Would we still stay friends after high school? Of course we would. We had agreed to be friends for life, no matter how long we went without seeing each other. It was one of those moments where you reflected on your past, appreciated the present, and somehow, in some insane way, even saw a glimpse of your future. And of course, because of the romantic I am, this glimpse involved us back in North Beach, going back to Tony’s, this time with our wives and kids, discussing how much things have changed, but really stayed the same.

  I hadn’t been on a date in a while. Well, that wasn’t exactly true. Previously, I was seeing (this is a fairly generous word) a girl from down south, one that I met on a free 10-day tour of Israel. Zionist propaganda? Check. Sweltering heat that never, ever let up? Of course. Extreme amounts of sexual tension between young Jewish adults, propped up by the magic of the mediterranean countryside? Oh my god, yes. Anyways, it was on and off, with us being in different places, both geographically and emotionally. After a particularly bad weekend, we broke things off. I was alone. And yet, in the throes of my emotions, I somehow thought that the best way to get over her was to jump right back into the dating scene. In short, I was ready to get hurt again. If the theme to Curb Your Enthusiasm isn’t playing in your head right now, it should be. A couple weeks later, I decided to go out with another girl. Pressed for options and out of my mind in anxiety, I suggested the comforting embrace of North Beach. She said yes.

   In truth, we had started over at Glen Park, but walked over to North Beach later in the night. If that seems like a long distance, it’s because it is. But I didn’t mind. My anxiety is quickly squashed whenever I have something physical to do. We walked and talked for a while, got caught in the rain, took pictures with old cars, and talked about how much we loved analog photography. I liked her. So it was really a move when I took her down to Filbert Steps to look at the city, illuminated in light and surrounded by water. The Filbert Steps are right down by Coit Tower, a cluster of old houses entrenched in flora that were once the life work of a gardener who lived there. It’s almost an otherworldly site, seeing these great buildings hidden in the flowers and trees of the hill they were built on. I wanted to explore and get lost, but then we just started talking, and I had completely forgotten about that. She said she needed to be home by 9, she had work the next day. By midnite, after glancing at my watch in the middle of a discussion about French workwear, I could tell that wasn’t going to happen. Suddenly, out of nowhere, Aaron Peskin, the Supervisor for District 8 (which includes North Beach) comes walking down the steps. Because I’m a north beach nerd, I recognized him immediately and asked ‘Hey, are you Aaron Peskin?’. He replied with this: ‘Nope! My name’s Bubba!’. It was probably the greatest thing that had ever happened to me. We had coincidentally sat right outside his house, and we begun to strike up conversation with the man. He was intelligent, knowledgeable, and seemed like a really great guy all around. He even offered me a job cat sitting while he was out of town later that summer. It felt like a dream. Later that night, I walked her back to her MUNI train. It was a good night. We both agreed that there definitely had to be a second date.  

  North Beach is a paradise, and I got the privilege to work over there this summer as an intern for a low-income housing complex. Many days were stressful, but the best part of it was the walk down Columbus on my way home, passing old cafes, Fiat repair shops, and old mom and pop bike stores. It made me feel good to be alive. In many ways, the whole neighborhood does. And that’s not something you can really describe, no matter how many words you put on paper.

[roguenewsdao]

Was Billy Graham Praying for Armageddon?

"On Saturday, February 1, 2003, I lifted my hands to begin praying and the Lord spoke to me ... I wanted to know whether the God the Father's direction was to go to war or not go to war.... The Lord said, ‘I am saying to go to war with Iraq’." -  Roy A. Reinhold as quoted by F. William Engdahl

"They feel that everything from the Nile to Euphrates belongs to Greater Israel." - RM interview with Mimi al-Laham aka Syrian Girl, October 15, 2017

This past month the world mourned the death of arguably one of the most famous Evangelical preachers of the 20th century. I certainly remember him as a fixture and "spiritual advisor" to kings and presidents during my childhood. I am speaking, of course, of William Franklin Graham, Jr. He is better known as Billy Graham.

F. William Engdahl certainly remembers him too. The title of today's blog is taken from a subheading that appears in Chapter 10 of Engdahl's book "Full Spectrum Dominance - Totalitarian Democracy In The New World Order." Mr. Engdahl was good enough to share the entire chapter with his fan club. I have been wanting to talk about Christian Zionism and the "Greater Israel" agenda ever since I read Mr. Engdahl's kind gift last November [feel free to grab the PDF file here of Chapter 10].

What escapes millions of people today is the underlying belief that the British monarchy fosters about their special bloodline. Someday perhaps we'll speak about this at length, but the short story here is that the British monarchy - who, by the way, is just about the only bloodline to have survived all the other royal bloodlines of Europe - believe that they are the natural heirs and legal claimants to throne of King David and Jerusalem. Even the word "Saxon" is thought to derive from the land of Scythia which could well be where many thousands of Israelites eventually were dispersed following both the Assyrian takeover of the northern kingdom of Israel and the later Babylonian takeover of the houses of Judah and Benjamin 800 years before Christ. [See David Livingstone's research linked here.]

In season one of the Netflix series "The Crown," I hooted and hollered when the show depicted the full, ancient Jewish rituals that are associated with the coronation of the British monarch. This is well depicted in Season One, Episode Five's "Smoke And Mirrors" title. I highly recommend that you watch and pay close attention to the words uttered by the Archbishop as he alchemically "transforms" the woman Elizabeth into a deity. Yes, that is what they believe and the script of the episode makes this abundantly clear.

In season two of the series, the entirety of episode six revolved around the Queen's fascination with the Billy Graham crusade and his visit to London. She requests a private audience with the holy man because she is wrestling with what to do with her favorite but disgraced uncle, the abdicated and former King Edward VIII, a notorious Nazi sympathizer.

Now, what the entire series "The Crown" as well as every other pro-British-monarchy drama will never, ever reveal to you is that the heart and soul of pretty much all Illuminati Secret Societies in Europe is this agenda they have to thwart God's choice for ruler of the throne of David and, instead, seat their own choice. Their choice for Messiah and King has been engineered to bleed some very - uhh - shall we say, "interesting" DNA through his veins. This belief that they hold dear is the cause of every war that has been fought since the fall of Rome and is even running as a prime motivating force behind the "Singularity" human-hybrid civilization that is currently being imposed on you.

So I just had to roll my eyes when I saw the true-life encounter of Billy Graham with the current holy grail of the bloodline, Queen Elizabeth II, back in 1955 depicted in the popular Netflix series. Then came along Rogue Money friend and highly respected researcher, F. William Engdahl. What Mr. Engdahl has to say about Billy Graham and other men of his ilk, religious leaders like Jerry Falwell, needs to be broadcast far and wide. You will never understand the motivation behind the coming battle in the Middle East until you understand how mainstream organized religion in America has been used as a staunch and loyal tool to bring it about.

Rapture Theology and the 'Greater Israel'

In Chapter 10 of his book cited above, Engdahl reminds us that the popular Evangelical concept of a coming Rapture is a relatively recent teaching dating back only as far as the 1850's. Oh, yes, they did find a single passage in the Bible on which to build the idea. How better to secure a popular base for your warmongering agenda than to take advantage of the public's devotion to sacred scripture? It's the ol' Problem-->Reaction-->Solution formula, in play, again.

In the mid-19th century, John Nelson Darby, a renegade Irish priest of the Church of Ireland, created the idea of "the Rapture" as he founded a new brand of Christian Zionism. His invented doctrine promoted the idea that "Born-Again Christians" would be taken up to Heaven before the second coming of Christ—their "rapture." Darby also put Israel at the heart of his strange new theology, claiming that an actual Jewish state of Israel would become the "central instrument for God to fulfill his plans for a final Battle of Armageddon."

Keep in mind the political and financial history of that time period. The West has just come through a period of anti-monarchist revolution. City of London and Amsterdam banksters are firmly in control of a vast planet-wide economy. Half the authority over armies and treasuries now sits in the hands of elected Parliamentarians, not Kings. The other half, whether that be pertinent to the ruling body of the UK or that of the USA, sits in the hands of Lords or Senators whose loyalty is given to the Banksters. Therefore, to control those armies and treasuries, you simply need to control the thinking and the voice of the proletariat.

In a world where The People still generally regard the Bible as authoritative, nobody directs their thinking better than the voice of the Clergy. Engdahl goes on to write:

Christian Zionists like Reverend Jerry Falwell and Rev. Pat Robertson could be traced back to a project of British Secret Intelligence services and the British establishment to use the Zion ideology to advance Empire and power in North America. American Christian Zionists in the period of American Empire in the 1950’s and later, merely adopted this ideology and gave it an American name. 

These American Christian Zionists, just below the surface, preached a religion quite opposite to the message of love and charity of the Jesus of the New Testament. In fact, it was a religion of hate, intolerance and fanaticism. The soil it bred in was the bitter race hatreds of the post-Civil War US South held by generations of whites against blacks and, ironically, against Catholics and Jews as ‘inferior’ races. Their religion was the religion of a coming Final Battle of Armageddon, of a Rapture in which the elect would be swept up to Heaven while the ‘infidels’ would die in mutual slaughter.

Do you see the Hegelian Dialectic in play? "The soil it bred in was the bitter race hatreds of the post-Civil War" South. That's how this works. You keep two polar opposites grinding at each other. Out of their conflict, a new path arises. Then you wash-rinse-repeat the cycle again.

Therefore, out of this period arose charismatic preachers like Billy Graham, Jerry Falwell, Pat Robertson, and others. Either wittingly or unwittingly, these leaders served the needs of that Babylonian Priesthood who is steadily moving an ancient football down the field toward a goal of ultimate one world government. The Priesthood has no qualms about hijacking sacred scripture and twisting their own blueprint of power out of it.

Regarding Billy Graham's son, Franklin, who also became a preacher in his own right, Engdahl goes on to say:

Echoing the anti-Islam fervor of Falwell and Robertson, Rev. Franklin Graham, son of the famous Christian evangelist and Bush family friend, Reverend Billy Graham, declared after September 11 that Islam was “a very evil and wicked religion.” The large US Southern Baptist Convention’s former President, Jerry Vines, called the Prophet Mohammed the most vile names imaginable. It was all about stirring Americans in a time of fear into hate against the Islamic world, in order to rev up Bush’s War on Terror.

Graham, who controlled an organization known as the Samaritan Purse, was a close religious adviser to George W. Bush. In 2003 Graham got permission from the US occupation authorities to bring his Evangelical anti-Islam form of Christianity into Iraq to win “converts” to his fanatical brand of Christianity. 

According to author Grace Halsell, Christian Zionists believed that “every act taken by Israel is orchestrated by God, and should be condoned, supported, and even praised by the rest of us.” It was all beginning to sound far too much like a new Holy Crusade against more than one billion followers of the Islamic faith.

I would add to Engdahl's last comment there about a "Holy Crusade against more than one billion followers of the Islamic faith" to include also the adherents of Jewish faith. In fact, during the 1970's, Billy Graham got caught in the revelations of the infamous "Nixon Tapes" and was even accused of being anti-Semitic [linked here]. I know that this is a point that many people struggle to come to terms with: how can an a person be pro-Zionist and yet anti-Semitic at the same time? 

The answer leads you to the very heart of the global network of secret societies. The key to reconciling such an apparent oxymoron is to realize that this entity that I refer to so often, this Babylonian Priesthood, sees itself as supra-human and actively in communion with supernatural beings or their human-hybrid avatars. When you look at the western history of the 19th and 20th centuries, it is easy to see how the Zionist agenda of British leaders like Lord Palmerston and documents like the Balfour Declaration were all stepping stones whose path has been carefully directed down to our day, a Sabbatean path whose cause has been somewhat gullibly supported by the powerful American "Bible Belt" puppets to wipe out anybody in the Middle East, Jews and Muslims alike, who gets in the way of the Priesthood.

To bring our discussion full circle and firmly cement it in the roots of that Babylonian Priesthood network, I'll present below another section from Engdahl's Chapter 10 to summarize the role that Freemasonry and Christian Zionism have played in moving that Priesthood's bloodthirsty anti-human manifesto forward.

Mr. Engdahl included a section in Chapter 10 entitled "Bush, Christian Zion and Freemasonry." Here are a few of his points:

A most difficult area to illuminate regarding American relations to right-wing Israeli Zionists and the ties between Israel and Christian Zionists such as Jerry Falwell, Rev. Franklin Graham, Pat Robertson, James Dobson, Gary Bauer and other US backers of the Right-wing Israeli Likud policies, was the role of international esoteric freemasonry.

Freemasonry has been defined as a secret or occult society which conceals its goals even from most of its own members, members who often are recruited naively as lower level members, unaware they are being steered from behind the curtains. The most powerful Freemasonic Order in the United States is believed to be the Supreme Council of the Scottish Rite, or the Ancient and Accepted Scottish Rite, with its world headquarters now in Washington, DC....

There was a special role played by one of the two major branches of Anglo-Saxon Freemasonry....The Scottish Rite enjoyed an active branch in Israel, even though it was nominally a Christian society. It spoke of its tradition going back to ‘the early masons who built King Salomon’s [sic] Temple.’ The fact that American Christian Zionists typically were concentrated in the South and came from the similar white racist strata as the Scottish Rite, and that they actively backed the Israeli fanatics who seek to rebuild the Third Temple of Salomon at the site of the sacred Al Aqsa Mosque and thereby ignite the Final Battle of Armageddon cannot be coincidence. All evidence suggested that the Jewish advocates of destroying Al Aqsa and rebuilding the Temple of Salomon there were being supported by the Scottish Rite masons in the United States and Britain.

Indeed, there was circumstantial evidence that much of the organized American Christian Right that backs Israeli right-wing policies was secretly backed by Scottish Rite masonry. The Southern Baptist Convention recently had a heated debate over allegations that some 500,000 of their members were also masons, reportedly most Scottish Rite. The Southern Baptist organization is well-known for its racial hatred of blacks. Cecil Rhodes, the man who was backed by Rothschild to create the mining empire of South Africa was a Scottish Rite member as was Lord Palmerston, also himself a British Israelite.

That, in a nutshell, is how you connect the dots between the the 17th century rise of the Rothschilds at the same time that the Illuminati, Rosicrucians, Jesuits, Sabbateans, and Freemasons were growing in power, and the modern-day Hegelian Dialectic opposition of Liberal Leftists and Conservative Rightists.

Satanism Boils Down to Lying

The takeaway of this blog is to show that there are hundreds of people who, either knowingly or unknowingly, have allowed themselves to be used as pawns by that Babylonian Priesthood. The Priesthood is actively promoting a vast deception. Millions of people have fallen under the spell of belief that they are the "chosen" who will be commuting to heaven. The cruel joke is that the Priesthood sees itself as the "chosen" who alone have the right to affix themselves to the heavenly realms of supernatural beings. By directing these charismatic leaders and their flocks to publicly "evangelize" that belief, the Priesthood has now verbalized the spell in order to effect its realization, a very Kabbalistic notion.

What the flock doesn't see is that the perpetuation of this spell is designed to lead themselves to a slaughter that likely will emanate from the territory of the 'Greater Israel' that Syrian Girl referenced in the opening quotation of this blog. When Jesus Christ walked the earth, he openly faced the agents of that Priesthood who even at that time exercised great influence over that same territory. Christ clearly exposed the root of their agenda. "You are from your father the Devil, and you wish to do the desires of your father. That one was a murderer when he began, and he did not stand fast in the truth, because truth is not in him," was the clear declaration that Christ broadcast in public. (John 8:44).

(Bill Graham, a long time spiritual advisor to President Nixon, delivered the eulogy at Nixon's funeral on April 27, 1994. And yet, according to the recent @DarkJournalist interview with Bob Merritt, the only men that Nixon trusted were Merritt and Kissinger - not Graham?)

It does not take a rocket scientist to figure out that if an institution is actively perpetuating a lie that will leads millions of people into a bloody war, then that institution is not aligned with the principles of Christianity. People often think of "Satanism" as referencing those dark ugly rituals of sex orgies and child sacrifices. To be sure, factions within those secret societies mentioned above are indeed participating in those acts. But Christ's definition of "Satanism" was much more broad: any ideology that promotes a deception and the murder of humankind is just as much a component of "Satanism" as the more obvious abhorrent practices.

In the next blog this week, I will include comments by W. The Intelligence Insider that speak to his opinion that the New World Order thugs are very much on track for launching that slaughter. #NoMoreSecretSocieties !

My Twitter contact information is found at my billboard page of SlayTheBankster.com. Listen to my radio show, Bee In Eden, on Youtube via my show blog at SedonaDeb.wordpress.com.

#BILLY GRAHAM #CRUSADE #JERRY FALWELL #MORAL MAJORITY #ENGDAHL #FULL SPECTRUM DOMINANCE #CHRISTIAN ZIONISM #GREATER ISRAEL #NEOCON #SAMARITAN PURSE #9/11 #ISLAM #ARMAGEDDON #WW4 #FREEMASONRY #ESOTERIC #SCOTTISH RITE #CECIL RHODES #DARBY #RAPTURE #EVANGELISM #EVANGELICAL #HEAVEN #NIXON #LIAR #FATHER OF THE LIE #WARMONGERING

[schraubd]

Tamika Mallory’s Israel Rehabilitation Tour

[For whatever reason this didn't cross-post properly. Apologies if it comes up twice. As a bonus, though, here's a link to a related thread I wrote on Twitter in conversation with Mallory] 

 When the controversy over antisemitism and Tamika Mallory first flared up, I noted that it had one very interesting characteristic: it wasn't about Israel. This is somewhat uncommon in left-of-center antisemitism disputes, and one could almost hear the gears grinding in Mallory's would-be defenders. So used to having "criticism of Israel isn't antisemitic" as their "get-out-of-talking-about-antisemitism-free" card, they were left almost dumbstruck. 

Mallory has been notoriously resistant to any serious reckoning with antisemitic sentiment on her part. She views herself as the victim here, and so she's seemingly cast about for new avenues to antagonize her Jewish tormentors. First it was going after the ADL. Now, as part of a "fact-finding" trip to Israel, it's blaming Netanyahu for Trump's border wall and Muslim ban.

Be clear: Donald Trump’s wall + #muslimban + #deportation plan are all lines out of the #Netanyahu book of oppression. Trump has referenced this himself. We ought pay attention & not allow folks to label us + try to black list us in to silence. #JusticeDelegation (more 2 come) — Tamika D. Mallory (@TamikaDMallory) May 7, 2018

In response to this tweet, Abe Silberstein articulated a common sense of Jewish dismay.

I dislike Bibi and Trump in equal measure, but our xenophobic politics precedes Israel's. I appreciate the fact that you visited the region, but I wish you had a better sense of your own reputation in the Jewish community before commenting like this https://t.co/V6bCi9CuPf — Abe Silberstein (@abesilbe) May 7, 2018

But in some ways I think Silberstein is missing the point. Mallory isn't tweeting unaware of what Jews think about her. Rather, her goal in this Israel trip is precisely to rehabilitate her reputation -- albeit not amongst Jews. 

Antisemitism, like racism, tends to take the path of least resistance down to the ground. As Paul Berman noted, while we

like to think of hatred of the Jews as a low, base sentiment that is entertained by nasty, ignorant people, wallowing in their own hatefulness. . . . normally it’s not like that. Hatred for the Jews has generally taken the form of a lofty sentiment, instead of a lowly one – a noble feeling embraced by people who believe they stand for the highest and most admirable of moral views.

If one dislikes Jews, there are many ways for that disdain to manifest. But among these diverse options, people with antisemitic views want to express those views in ways that will gain social approval -- at least in the communities they care about. Hence, we should expect that antisemitic sentiments will be systematically channeled in directions where their expression can expect to find validation and laudation. The content of those sentiments will vary from community to community. In some railing against "globalist financiers" will do the trick. In others speaking of those who "crucified Christ" will work. And of course, in still others, lambasting Zionist perfidy is the winning ticket.* 

Note the argument is not that "criticism of Israel is inherently antisemitic", any more than I'm saying orthodox Christian beliefs are inherently antisemitic or opposing the political preferences of wealthy billionaires is. My argument is exactly what was stated above: that in certain communities positions of this ilk provide a convenient point of discharge for antisemitic sentiments that offer up the path of least resistance. Precisely because there are perfectly valid critiques of Israel that are, on face, wholly laudable from within a progressive paradigm, a speaker harboring antipathy towards Jews and looking for a socially-acceptable vector to express them will gravitate toward that issue. A conservative speaker with the same internal sense of grievance towards Jews might pick a different path to the ground. Put another way, we should expect that if someone with progressive-inclinations harbors antisemitic sentiments (consciously or not), they'd be most likely to express them in the idiom of anti-Israel speech. Why wouldn't they? Antisemitism will always be expressed in the dominant language of the place and the time, and it is entirely predictable that people will seek to express antisemitism in ways that enhance rather than detract from their social standing. 

In Mallory's case, then, the shift from Farrakhan to the ADL to Israel is a move from forms of antisemitism that encountered great resistance to that which will (again, in the relevant communities) gain plaudits. It is a rehabilitation tour because it moves her sense of grievance towards Jews out of a context where even her allies would have trouble defending her, to an arena where people in her community are quite accustomed to dismissing Jewish complaints. Even though the sequence of events for Mallory offers compelling evidence that she's at least in part motivated by a sense of antipathy against Jews, because she's now expressing her disdain in terms of anti-Israel sentiment people will ironically view further complaints about her antisemitism as weaker rather than stronger.

Finally, I want to remark on the specific content of her tweet -- claiming that Trump's anti-immigrant and anti-Muslim policies are cases of him following the Israeli lead -- because I think it's also "rehabilitative" in its way, and it's worth articulating why that's so. As many people have noted, there is something more than a bit absurd about the contention that American conservatives need an Israeli example to enact racist and White supremacist policies. Moreover, it ends up acting as an indirect apologia for American racism -- asserting that it is not truly homegrown but rather is a foreign disease imported from Israel. Why would Tamika Mallory find that sort of claim attractive?

I discussed a similar move when Winona LaDuke made a putative critique of America's implication in colonialist and genocidal practices by saying "we are Israel". One would think that "Israel is us" would be the more accurate label, since "even if we thought that Israel was a valid case of colonialism ... surely it isn't the paradigm case."

But note the subtle shift of responsibility here -- our misdeeds are characterized as following another's evil example. Israel stands in for our own misdeeds -- it is the platonic ideal of our own wrongs. We are not intrinsically bad, we're only bad insofar as we're "Israel". Our absolution comes when we're no longer Israel. It offers a way to maintain a sense of moral growth and possibility by externalizing the source of the sins onto another body deemed irredeemably corrupt.

There is, I suggest, a perverse form of patriotism at work here. By suggesting that American misdeeds are actually instances of a foreign (Jewish) infection, the implication is that the American body itself is not the problem. The issue is outwards, not inwards. The fundamental appeal of "the Jews are our misfortune" is that it actually allows for a sort of redemptive American narrative to emerge, and for even those most critical of contemporary American policies to lay claim to it. 

One thing that is often-forgotten when talking about antisemitism, or racism, or other systemic hatreds, is that they are productive ideologies. They build things, they engender alliances, they motivate actions. Reflexive claims that antisemitism "hurts our movement" always thus struck me as far too pat -- of course it depends on how one defines the goals of the movement, but more fundamentally it overlooks the way that antisemitism can represent a genuine and attractive tool of mobilization. Given the choice between arguing against American support for the Muslim ban by articulating how it reflects fundamental malformations that are deeply-rooted in our national character, versus arguing against it by saying we've been led astray by the Jews -- it's quite plausible that the second route might be more effective than the first. 

And so again, we see a form of rehabilitation here. Any organization seeking to make the sort of wide-ranging and deep-cutting critique of discriminatory American practices that the Woman's March does is going to face the inevitable charge that it is "anti-American" in some way. It is hard to counter these accusations, even though they are deeply unfair, because it's always hard to demonstrate love for a place or institution while simultaneously leveling a radical critique (something Jews with sharp objections to many Israeli policies are quite painfully aware of). So the temptation will be to cheat: the problem isn't with America, you see; the problem is with those Jews over there ruining America. One need not reject America; one need only "de-Zionise" it. 

People think that when Tamika Mallory blames Israel as the source of American anti-immigrant and Islamophobic policies, she's revealing herself to be more radical than ever before. In reality, though, it is a significant step back towards the mainstream. The radical critique -- the one that it is so hard for many Americans to latch onto -- is the claim that we, America, are our own problem. We are responsible for our own decisions; our hatreds, our injustices, our wrongdoings stem from nobody but ourselves. In Richard Rorty's trenchant words: "There is nothing deep down inside us except what we have put there ourselves." But to the extent that problem is not in ourselves, but rather came to us from Israel -- well much of that discomfort can go away and a radical critique instantly becomes far more digestible. 

Plenty of people who'd resist mightily the notion that there is something fundamentally wrong with America are entirely happy to agree that there's something fundamentally wrong with outsiders, with aliens, with others, who've insidiously managed to infect our great nation. And so I suspect that Mallory will find many willing and eager recipients of this new message. After all, it is saying nothing more than what so many have long wished to hear. 

* Racism almost certainly works in the same way. People don't just want to be racist, they want to be racist in ways that earn them validation and enhanced social standing. Hence, they will flock to argumentative pathways which allow them to express hostility or disdain for racial outgroups in ways that are socially legitimate. There's a reason why so much anti-Latino sentiment now gets channeled through language about "securing the border". The issue isn't that there are no valid arguments to be had about how permissive or restrictive our immigration policy should be. The issue is that, in context, these debates are simply the most convenient forum where persons already harboring anti-Latino sentiments can discharge their antipathy with minimum social resistance. One of the primary impacts of Trumpism has been to greatly increase the number of viable social pathways for expressing racist, antisemitic, Islamophobic, and other bigoted sentiments -- greatly multiplying their "paths to the ground" and hence dramatically magnifying their social reach.

[ruminativerabbi]

Learning to Listen

The Israeli-Palestinian dispute has many unique features, by which I mean qualities that it specifically does not share with similar geo-political disputes and which are features particularly of the parties to it. But there are other features that it does share with other disputes between nations or peoples, into which category I would put those aspects of the problem that are specifically not especially unique to the players involved. I suppose there are probably many different aspects to the endless sikhsukh between Arab and Jew in the Holy Land that could be included in that second category, but I think probably the most prominent of them all—and paradoxically both the most difficult to resolve and, in other ways, also the simplest—is the inability both sides show with remarkable regularity to see the people on the other side of the fence at all clearly. Or to hear them when they speak. Or to listen without prejudice to what they wish to say.

There are circles, as I am well aware, in which even the suggestion that the responsibility for the situation as it has evolved to date could or, worse, should be shared by the involved parties is anathema. I have fallen prey to that line of thinking myself. And although I find some scant comfort in the fact that I was in excellent (and famous) company in that regard, the reality of the situation no longer affords anyone who longs for peace in the region the luxury of listening only to his or her own voice. To describe those willing to listen to dissenting opinions as terminally gullible seems beyond childish at this point: it seems counterproductive and morally indefensible to imagine that peace can ever be made between people who are not prepared even formally, let alone intently, to listen to each other and to respond honestly and genuinely to what the other party has to say. It is certainly so that lots of what people say about the Middle East is nonsense, their arguments baseless blather and their positions intellectually and morally indefensible. The problem is that there’s no way to weigh the worth of other people’s opinions without listening to them carefully, and doing so generously and without prejudice. To do that, however, requires that you at least occasionally stop talking yourself. But that inability to fall silent with someone else speaks turns out, more than slightly paradoxically, to be one of the major things Israelis and Palestinians actually do have in common.

All this by way of introducing to you a very interesting book I finished reading earlier this week, Yossi Klein Halevi’s Letters to My Palestinian Neighbor. Published just last month by HarperCollins, the book is remarkable in several different ways and I would like to recommend it as serious, thoughtful summer reading for anyone who wants to understand—and on a particularly intelligent, reasonable plain—the underlying reasons that the Israeli-Palestinian dispute seems so intractable.

Halevi has framed his book as a series of letters to an unidentified neighbor living in Iswiya, the Arab town on the other side of the separation fence that blocks access to French Hill, the modern Israeli neighborhood adjacent to the Mount Scopus campus of the Hebrew University in which Halevi lives. For readers unfamiliar with the geography of Jerusalem, the basic principle is that, with certain famous exceptions, most Arab villages—including ones inside the municipal boundaries of Jerusalem—and the Jewish communities almost adjacent to them are sealed off from each other, if not precisely by law, then by custom: my own apartment in Arnona is not half a mile from the Arab village of Jabel Mukaber, but I’ve never been there and wouldn’t think of going there—it would be unsafe and unwise—and neither do I know anyone who has ever gone there. That’s just how it is. Yet I see Arab families all the time in the shopping malls in Talpiyot, the neighborhood directly to our west, and no one seems to notice or care. It’s all a little hard to explain, but Halevi’s idea—which I think he manages to carry through successfully—is both to notice and to care…and also to imagine that where people shop contiguously and eat at adjacent tables in restaurants, they could also speak to each other honestly and from the heart…if they felt that there was someone actually listening. A little bit, he’s tilting at windmills. But he’s also taken the remarkable step of having his entire book—this book that I’m writing to you about—translated into Arabic and posted for free download on a website that should be easily accessible to all Israeli and Palestinian Arabs.

The author writes frankly and from the heart. To the Palestinians, he offers the clear message that they are doing themselves a disservice and more or less guaranteeing that almost no Israelis will listen seriously (or even at all, really), when they speak as though the Jewish connection to the Land of Israel began in the nineteenth century and refuse on principle to take the preceding millennia into account, millennia which included centuries of Jewish autonomy in that place and of ongoing spiritual, emotional, and intellectual attachment to it. Indeed, when Palestinian leaders insist—passionately but ridiculously—that the entire Bible is a falsification of history, that there never was a Temple on the Temple Mount, that the Davidic kingdom never existed, that all the archeological evidence that ties the Jewish people to the Land of Israel is bogus and phony, they are more or less guaranteeing that no Israeli with any sense of pride in his or her nation will still be listening after the first sentence or two. But when Israelis, and particularly religious Israelis, wave away the Palestinians as mere interlopers because their ancestors only arrived on the scene a mere twelve centuries ago, they are guaranteeing no less surely that no thoughtful Palestinian born in that place and whose whole sense of identity is tied to his or her national sense of self is going to continue listening after the first few words either.

In other words, what both sides have accomplished magnificently is the discovery and honing of precisely the right kind of code words to use so as to be able to guarantee that no one will actually be listening when you finally do stand up to speak.

Halevi addresses painful, difficult topics in the course of his letters to his unidentified neighbor across the security fence. He talks openly—and passionately—about the way that terrorism has taken its toll not only on the specific individuals who have died as the result of Palestinian terror attacks, but on the national consciousness of Israelis as well. And he also writes, in my opinion remarkably openly, about the specific reasons so many Israelis do not feel themselves able to believe truly that their Palestinian neighbors wish to live in peace. Indeed, when he asks, not guilelessly but sharply and acidulously, why the Palestinians have turned down so many different offers of statehood—at Camp David and at Oslo, but also on other occasions as well—if they truly wish to negotiate a settlement and get on with the work of nation building, he is merely doing his part to hold up his end of the dialogue honestly and candidly.

One review I read suggested that the best way to read this book would be first to read an entirely different one: Hillel Halkin’s Letters to an American Jewish Friend, published in 1977 and still in print. I was in my final year at JTS when that book came out and I remember reading it and feeling both inspired by its argument, yet unjustly marginalized by its conclusions. The book angered me—which I’m sure was exactly the response the author hoped to provoke—but also challenged me to revisit my feelings about living in the diaspora and about my personal relationship to Israel. I recommend the book highly to all my readers, however: here is a truly passionate argument for aliyah that all who wish truly honestly to engage with the Zionist ideal should read.  

For most, it will not be pleasant reading. But political writing at its best is not meant to soothe, but to irritate—somewhat in the way sand irritates oysters into producing pearls—and to allow readers to confront their complacency and address the logical flaws or moral sloppiness in the way they approach the philosophical or political issues that engage them the most passionately. I see that reviewer’s point and second the motion: to read those two books, one after the other, would truly to engage with the twin axes of Israel life: the x-axis of Jewishness which connects Israelis with Jews in all the lands of our dispersion, and the y-axis of rootedness in the land which ties Israelis, whether they like it or not, to the Palestinians who self-define in terms of their own rootedness in that same soil. And for those of us whose hearts beat with Israel, that kind of engagement with the grid can only produce insight into what we all understand is a very complicated situation.  Anna Porter, who wrote a very intelligent review of Halevi’s book for the Toronto newspaper, The Globe and Mail (click here to read it), wraps up her appraisal by noting that “Israel is a very complicated country.” That, surely, we can all agree is true. But books like Halevi’s are attempts to shed more light than heat on the precise issues that make life in the Holy Land so complicated…and to inspire a dialogue, for once, that is rooted in reality rather than rhetoric.

Since I am not a Palestinian, I am presumably not the intended audience for a book entitled “Letters to My Palestinian Neighbor.” Nor will the large majority of people reading this be. Nonetheless, I recommend this to you all wholeheartedly as an opportunity to look out at the world, and the Middle East in particular, through Yossi Klein Halevi’s eyes. Particularly for young people eager to understand their parents’ deep commitment to Israel but unsure of where they personally stand, this book will be an eye-opening, inspiring read.

#Yossi Klein Halevi #Palestinians and Israelis #Hillel Halkin