|
|
home / subscribe / donate / tower / books / archives / search / links / feedback / events / faq
|
Is it the guy who asks you after the meeting about how the antiwar movement needs to get "serious" and asks you lots of questions about terrorism and "fighting back"? Jennifer Van Bergen reports, first-hand. Part 2 of our series on what really happened on 9/11/2001: the physics of collapse, and how not to make a "pancake" by Manuel Garcia, PLUS Engineer Pierre Sprey on why "controlled demolition" theories are off target. What you just missed, but can still get, in our last newsletter: Paul Craig Roberts on the Collapse of America. CounterPunch Online is read by millions of viewers each month! But remember, we are funded solely by the subscribers to the print edition of CounterPunch. Please support this website by buying a subscription to our newsletter, which contains fresh material you won't find anywhere else, or by making a donation towards the cost of this online edition. Remember contributions are tax-deductible. Click here to make a donation. If you find our site useful please: Subscribe Now! |
|
Today's Stories October 17, 2006 James Brooks
October 16, 2006 Gary Leupp Patrick Cockburn David Wilson Robert Fisk Robert Jensen Ingmar Lee
/ Krista Roessingh Mike Whitney Jake Whitney Sanho Tree Website of
the Day
Uri Avnery John Walsh Jean Bricmont Jennifer Van Bergen Ralph Nader Floyd Rudmin Mark Weisbrot Laura Carlsen Hani Shukrallah Dr. Susan Block John Chuckman Lucinda Marshall Don Monkerud Missy Comley
Beattie Ron Jacobs Website of
the Weekend
October 13, 2006 Jorge Mariscal Stephen Philion John Blair Col. Dan Smith Alastair Crooke / Mark Perry Stephen Fleischman Charles Perroud Anne E. Brodsky Website of the Day
October 12, 2006 Jonathan Cook Norman Solomon M. Shahid Alam Paul Craig
Roberts Meredith Schafer / Chris Kutalik Carl Gelderloos Alastair Crooke / Mark Perry Charles Sullivan William S. Lind CP News Service Website of
the Day
October 11, 2006 John Feffer Dave Lindorff Jackson Katz April Howard / Ben Dangl Michael Carmichael Ken Couesbouc Gregory Afghani Alexander Cockburn Website of
the Day
October 10, 2006 Paul Craig
Roberts Robert Robideau Joshua Frank Dave Lindorff Dave Zirin Heather Gray James Knotwell Missy Beattie Mike Whitney David Rosen Website of the Day
Robert Fisk Norman Solomon Ron Jacobs Gideon Levy Walter Brasch Mickey Z. John Holt Lucinda Marshall Saul Landau Website of the Day
October 7 /
8, 2006 Alexander Cockburn Peter Kwong Ralph Nader Mark Donham Dave Lindorff Peter Bosshard Ron Jacobs Lawrence R.
Velvel Fred Gardner David Green Jim B. Missy Beattie Michael Donnelly Jackson Thoreau Jon Hung CounterPunch
News Service Tom D'Antoni Poets' Basement Website of the Weekend
Alison Weir Tiffany Ten
Eyck / Mark Brenner Corporate Crime Reporter Juan Antonio
Montecino Walden Bello Christopher
Brauchli Brynne Keith-Jennings Jonathan Cook Website of the Day
John Walsh Carol Norris Paul Craig Roberts Ricardo Alarcón James Abourezk Nicola Nasser Kirkpatrick Sale Uri Avnery Website of the Day
Elizabeth Terzakis Paul Wolf Sean Penn Dave Lindorff Diane Farsetta Sharon Smith Felice Pace Sara Roy Website of
the Day
Jennifer Van
Bergen Greg Moses Stan Cox Niranjan Ramakrishnan Evelyn Pringle Fred Wilhelms Michael Abelman Gary Leupp Website of the Day
October 2, 2006 Eric Hazan Mike Whitney Norman Solomon Assaf Kfoury Missy Beattie Arthur Neslen Paula J. Caplan Website of the Day
Sept. 30 /
0ct. 1, 2006 Paul Craig
Roberts Marjorie Cohn Ben Tripp Ron Jacobs Ralph Nader Mike Whitney Christopher Reed Seth Sandronsky Fred Gardner Mokhiber /
Weissman Michael Dickinson Alan Gregory Poets' Basement
September 29, 2006 Bruce Jackson Michael J.
Smith Emira Woods William S.
Lind David Swanson Jonathan Cook Website of the Day
Sen. Russ Feingold Ron Jacobs Mokhiber /
Weissman Lee Sustar Robert Jensen John Chuckman Evelyn Pringle Nicola Nasser Uri Avnery Website of the Day
Patrick Cockburn Camilo Mejia Ben Terrall Ridgeway /
Ng Joe Allen Andrew Wimmer Franklin C. Spinney Website of
the Day
Hani Shukrallah William Blum Niranjan Ramakrishnan Barbara Becnel Paul Rockwell Dave Lindorff Rich Gibson Anthony Papa Nate Mezmer Uri Avnery Website of the Day
Patrick Cockburn Jonathan Cook Joshua Frank Paul Craig
Roberts Robert Jensen Dave Lindorff Norman Solomon Dr. Charles
Jonkel Michael Dickinson Alexander Cockburn Website of
the Day
September 23
/ 24, 2006 Jonathan Cook Jeffrey St.
Clair Dr. Anon Tom Barry Carl G. Estabrook Laura Carlsen Todd Chretien Dr. Charles
Jonkel Debbie Nathan Fred Gardner Fred Wilhelms Seth Sandronsky Ralph Nader Rev. William
Alberts Jon Van Camp Heather Gray David Vest Jeffrey St.
Clair Poets' Basement Website of
the Weekend Video of the Weekend
September 22, 2006 Patrick Cockburn Michael Donnelly Ramzy Baroud Evo Morales Stanley Howard Sarah Leah
Whitson JoAnn Wypijewski Website of the Day
Mahmoud Ahmadi-Nejad Justin E. H.
Smith Mike Roselle Amira Hass Deborah Rich Mickey Z. Saul Landau Website of
the Day
Sharon Smith Christopher
Reed John Ross Joshua Frank Arthur Neslen Norman Solomon Michael Carmichael Evelyn Pringle Hugo Chavez Website of the Day
Patrick Cockburn Jeff Leys Brian M. Downing Col. Dan Smith Liaquat Ali
Khan Ron Jacobs Nik Barry-Shaw
/ Yves Engler Lucinda Marshall Saul Landau Photo of the Day Website of
the Day
Carl Boggs Uri Avnery Mike Stark / Jim Bullington Joshua Frank John Murphy Ramzy Baroud Dave Lindorff Bill Quigley Website of the Day
Subscribe Online
|
October 17, 2006 Hit and RunGuerrilla ReviewingBy MICHAEL NEUMANN The Guerrilla News Network web site
seems slightly retro, slightly well-off, slightly out-of-kilter
cool, like Lily Allen in a Che Guevara T-shirt. The guys may
wear berets. They do guerrilla book reviews: In my case the attack was on The Case Against Israel, and the attacker is Ari Paul, who also does music reviews. I read the review, a couple of weeks late, I write a reply, I send it to GNN. But I don't get the guerrilla reviewers, I get the guerrilla apparatchiks. They only have first names, like code names. First (not to count a message
or two that go unanswered) my email with the reply gets returned
undelivered. I write somebody else. He tells me to send it in
the body of the email, to the original address, so I do. ( I
guess they can't do WORD attachments up in the mountains.).
...which is what I mean by apparatchik. I send some snarky reply, I look for the review and quietly, suddenly, it's gone, gone from the GNN site. My message goes unanswered. Hit and run, like Ché. Only this is more like hit
and run, by drunk driver. His car hits a pedestrian in the night
and he drives off, praying not to be detected. Israel: Always Wrong? Israel's assault on Lebanon has renewed interest in the question of Israel's legitimacy as a sovereign nation. Even in the Washington Post, Richard Cohen writes that Israel is "an honest mistake, a well-intentioned mistake, a mistake for which no one is culpable." And for Michael Neumann, a professor of philosophy at Trent University in Ontario, Israel's independence in 1948 was like a giant glass of milk spilling over a World War II era map of the Middle East. More than a half-century and several armed conflicts later, this grown man is still sobbing about it in a new book. It is more than just a blanket "Palestinians right, Israelis wrong" shtick. Rather, in The Case Against Israel, he attempts to build the moral case that Israel and the Zionist movement were always in the wrong because their presence has always been illegitimate. Some of his passages are interesting. He makes the case that Israeli and Palestinian violence cannot be compared, because Palestinians, he argues, saw a threat of extinction for Zionism's inception. Neumann stops short of defending all aspects of the Palestinian resistance. "Certainly," he writes, "it is not beyond criticism." But instead of living in the now and looking for ways to end violence, Neumann concentrates on some shaky logic to put all the blame on Israel. He cares more about talking about "who did it" than "what can be done about it." Many of the logical leaps he uses are dubious and facts are often taken out of context. For example, he claims that many of the most religious Jews oppose the concept of Israel as a way to undermine Zionism's necessity to Judaism. Yet, what is not stated is that ultra-religious Jews such as Satmars oppose Zionism because they only believe in Jewish state when a biblical prophecy is fulfilled; they'll be eager to war with the Arabs when their Messiah comes. For Neumann to ignore this in order to make this fit his rhetoric is disingenuous. For him to not know this would disqualify many of his assertions about Judaism. But one major flaw in Neumann's vision of Israeli history is the way he discusses Zionism. While recognizing divisions, he seems to hold all Zionists, including labor Zionists and those interested in bi-nationalism, accountable for the extremist religious types and settler movements. But the case is that Zionism should actually be called Zionisms. Like socialism, there are different brands and sects that have ideologies that are opposed to one another. And much of Neumann's case rests on the idea that no group of people has the right to their own state. For his reasons, then, he could have also made the case against Pakistan, as Mohammad Ali Jinnah's creation resulted in clashes killing millions. Should Israel get an extra kick in the rear from utopian internationalists? "All forms of nationalism differ," says Noam Chomsky. "Some are incomparably worse than contemporary Zionism. Early Zionism had many very attractive features, though it was always problematic." But the greater problem with Neumann's book is that it is part of a growing section of the contemporary Palestinian rights movement that embraces reactionary, undemocratic and anti-progressive political rhetoric. Instead of looking for creative ways to ensure peace in the region for the maximum amount of people regardless of their ethnicity, people like Neumann insist that Israel eternally damned by original sin or that the modern and predominant Jewish political response to centuries of genocide and persecution can only be seen as ethnic supremacy. The result is that all of Israel's benefits are shunned and the Palestinians are portrayed as persecuted angels. Yes, the policies of the occupation are wrong and should be opposed. Yes, there is discrimination in Israeli society and progressives should work to resist that. But Israel's political scene is like a jigsaw puzzle of ideologies from the left to the right. In Israel, many authors have noted, Jewish fundamentalists are often to subject of scorn by the general secular population. Israeli-Arabs hold positions in academia and the government. By contrast, Islamic politics have been strengthened in Palestine thanks to Hamas' control of the government. Neumann's paradigm now puts a society governed by religious fanatics over a government that has at least some semblance of a democratic process. If there is anything that can ever legitimize Israel even when it's founding did shed the blood of the innocent (like pretty much any other colonial endeavor) is that aspects of liberal democracy can be nurtured in order to defeat authoritarians and theocrats. A real progressive would aim to push Israel in the right direction, regardless of the question of Zionism' legitimacy. With Lebanon torn apart by Israel's bombs, it can be hard for anyone to look at the conflict and think there might be a solution that suits Israelis and Arabs alike. Yet, Neumann's stubborn and reactionary form of moral absolutism answers little in how to end the madness. Yet Palestinian president Mahmoud Abbas gave a much more pragmatic and rational insight at a meeting of Palestinian and Israeli leaders in Jordan last June. "We have both suffered," the New York Times reported him saying, "and we should not increase the suffering of the other." http://gnn.tv/articles/2533/Israel_Always_Wrong Reply to Ari Paul The 'Guerilla News Network' seems quite upset that my book, The Case against Israel, defends the Palestinians even when they're guerillas. Mr. Ari Paul, who doubtless has no axe to grind, prefers "pragmatic and rational insight". He says that "for Michael Neumann... Israel's independence in 1948 was like a giant glass of milk spilling over a World War II era map of the Middle East. More than a half-century and several armed conflicts later, this grown man is still sobbing about it... ." (http://atrain.gnn.tv/articles/2533/Israel_Always_Wrong) But I don't sob because, as the book says, "In some ways, the more cynical Zionists are right: Israel's foundations, even if every single allegation of ethnic cleansing is completely accurate, are no worse than those of most other states." As for "not living in the now", the book's 90 pages on "Zionism and the birth of Israel" are followed by 101 pages on "The Current Situation". I'm accused of making 'logical leaps'. After 25 years of teaching logic, I've learned that such accusations are invariably caught pants-down when it comes to specifics. Ari Paul, for instance, says I take facts out of context, and am disingenuous. This would certainly make me a bad person, but what has that to do with logic? He chides me for not informing the world "that ultra-religious Jews such as Satmars oppose Zionism because they only believe in Jewish state [sic] when a biblical prophecy is fulfilled; they'll be eager to war with the Arabs when their Messiah comes." He says, "For him to not know this would disqualify many of his assertions about Judaism." Nope, Ari, it would disqualify none of my assertions: I could be ignorant of this alleged fact yet my assertions could be true. They stand or fall on their own merits, not on how much I know. And indeed I didn't know that, not even after reading Yakov Rabkin's entire book on the orthodox critique of Zionism. (A Threat from Within: A Century of Jewish Opposition to Zionism). Rabkin tells me that orthodox Jews oppose Zionism because the orthodox tradition rejects all attempts to set up a secular state, and sees salvation in following God's ways. I'm not sure how the explicitly anti-political goal of following God's ways, before or after the Messiah, will give the orthodox something to go to war with 'the Arabs' about. And I'm not sure at what point in human history anti-Zionist orthodox Jews will be 'eager for war at all. In the view of the anti-Zionist orthodox Rabbi Moshe Ber Beck, Jews are forbidden "to re-establish their nationhood by military might ". (http://www.jewsnotzionists.org/). Doesn't sound too warlike to me.. Maybe I'm wrong. Maybe in a zillion years, the Messiah will come. Maybe then there will be problems. I guess Ari Paul thinks it's bad to live in the past, but good to live in one of many remotely possible distant futures, the one in which anti-Zionist Jews fight 'the Arabs' to establish a Jewish state But why does any of this matter?. I claimed that many religious Jews oppose Zionism and deplore the state of Israel, "so even were religion a valid basis for land claims, it would not provide a valid basis for Zionism." I first said that religion was not, in fact, a valid basis for land claims. I was speaking of this world, not The World in Which The Messiah Cometh. And what do my cursory remarks on this detail have to do with the central issues separating Israelis and Palestinians? Ari Paul doesn't know, but he does know how to blow smoke. Ari Paul moves from indirection to apologetics when he says, "While recognizing divisions, he seems to hold all Zionists, including labor Zionists and those interested in bi-nationalism, accountable for the extremist religious types and settler movements. But the case is that Zionism should actually be called Zionisms. Like socialism, there are different brands and sects that have ideologies that are opposed to one another." Now we're being asked to look kindly on the wonderful multiplicity that is Zionism because a few Jewish soft-nationalists in short pants liked to play Socialist Working Man on the backs of the Palestinians. I did not hold the binationalists accountable for the extremist religious types and settler movements. They were too ineffectual to be 'accountable' for anything at all. I maintained that they never got beyond visions of gooey brotherhood to explain how any serious conflicts between Zionist Jews and Palestinians were to be settled: "were or weren't the Zionists going to accept a state in which, perhaps on matters of life and death, it was possible for the citizens to decide against the Jews?" I claimed that, because this and other hard questions were not and could not be answered, the idea was a non-starter from day one. The binationalists' childish idealism led out its short wilted life under the auspices of the mainstream Zionist movement, bent on establishing racially Jewish sovereignty in Palestine. This is a bit like preaching integration and brotherhood in a daycare run by the KKK. Ari Paul tells us that "Neumann's paradigm now puts a society governed by religious fanatics over a government that has at least some semblance of a democratic process. ...A real progressive would aim to push Israel in the right direction, regardless of the question of Zionism' legitimacy." This is just the sort self-deceiving closet racism so characteristic of 'progressive' Zionists. The idea is that Israel, dedicated to ethnic rule, deserves the benefit of a doubt, despite the fact that its 'semblance of democracy' has for forty years held the power of life and death over a captive population who have absolutely no say in their fate. This population is now starving, but, ever-sensitive to Israel's 'jigsaw puzzle of ideologies from the left to the right', we apparently should confine ourselves to giving Israel a chummy little 'push in the right direction'. Why is that more progressive or realistic than supporting the Palestinians and their allies - and perhaps even, once the Palestinians are free, trying to push Hamas in 'the right direction'? Why is it that the practitioners of ethnic nationalism, a doctrine with so many millions of corpses to its credit, are a better prospect than Islam, whose worst atrocities can't even begin to match those of Our Side? And why is it progressive to join with Bush and Condoleezza Rice in their faith that Israel does, after all, Share our Values, our democratic ideals? These are the mysteries of bad faith. Ari Paul says "people like Neumann insist that Israel [is] eternally damned by original sin or that the modern and predominant Jewish political response to centuries of genocide and persecution can only be seen as ethnic supremacy." But no one says that Israel and Zionism can only 'be seen as ethnic supremacy'. The point is that whatever else we can see them as, they are indeed committed to ethnic supremacy, and have made it a bloody reality. This reality belongs to the Israel of today. It is not something dredged out of the past. And it's sleazy evasions like Ari Paul's which have sold this creepy state to rubes the world over. Michael Neumann is a professor of philosophy at Trent University in Ontario, Canada. Professor Neumann's views are not to be taken as those of his university. His book What's Left: Radical Politics and the Radical Psyche has just been republished by Broadview Press. He contributed the essay, "What is Anti-Semitism", to CounterPunch's book, The Politics of Anti-Semitism. His latest book is The Case Against Israel. He can be reached at: mneumann@trentu.ca. GNN editor Anthony Lappé responds: GNN's editors did not post Paul's article. GNN is an OPEN publishing system that gives 1000s of members from around the world to post their own content - Neumann was free to respond to Paul himself by simply logging onto our site and either writing a blog, creating an article or posting in the forum. Anthony Lappé
|
from CounterPunch Books! The Case Against Israel By Michael Neumann  Grand Theft Pentagon: Tales of Greed and Profiteering in the War on Terror by Jeffrey St. Clair          Sick of sit-on-the-Fence speakers, tongue-tied and timid? CounterPunch Editors Alexander Cockburn and Jeffrey St Clair are available to speak forcefully on ALL the burning issues, as are other CounterPunchers seasoned in stump oratory. Call CounterPunch Speakers Bureau, 1-800-840-3683. Or email beckyg@counterpunch.org.  The Occupation by Patrick Cockburn                        |
