RUTHFULLY YOURS

False moral equivalence is one of a series of major fallacies. False moral equivalence comparing Israel’s actions to those of the Nazis was used by several prominent social-democratic politicians, including French President François Mitterrand, Swedish Prime Minister Olof Palme and Greek Prime Minister Andreas Papandreou.

Another example of false moral equivalence is calling Israel an Apartheid State. Former U.S. president Jimmy Carter made this comparison in his 2006 book, Palestine Peace Not Apartheid — which incorporates the false moral equivalence in its title.

The false comparison between Zionism and racism has been repeated countless times through United Nations and UN-sponsored declarations and conferences.

Another category of moral equivalence pretends that the intended murder of innocent civilians is equal to the accidental deaths of civilians in targeted assassinations. For instance U.S. Secretary of State John Kerry compared the three civilians murdered in the 2013 Boston Marathon to the nine activists who had planned violence and were killed by Israeli soldiers they attacked on the Mavi Marmara ship in 2013.

Among the many tools mobilized for the demonization of Israel, one frequently used is a mode of argument known as false moral equivalence. The term “moral equivalence,” originates from a 1906 address by American philosopher William James.[1] It is the claim that there is no difference between two actions of greatly varying character. It is frequently used to emphasize similarities between two otherwise dissimilar acts. False moral equivalence undermines norms and values in a society, blurring the lines between good and evil also right and wrong.

False moral equivalence comparing Israel’s actions to those of the Nazis was used by several prominent social-democratic politicians, including French President François Mitterrand,[2] Swedish Prime Minister Olof Palme[3] and Greek Prime Minister Andreas Papandreou. [4]

When two dissimilar realities are linked such as Israel and Nazism, use of one side of the equivalence will eventually automatically bring to mind the other – however distorted the comparison may be. Subsequent repetition results in an acceptance, where the false moral equivalence is no longer countered or questioned.

False moral equivalence should not be confused with moral relativism. The latter lends itself to the justification of behavior by claiming that they are acceptable in a certain culture’s values or were common practice during certain periods of history.[5]

Moral equivalence embodies comparisons, defined by the Merriam-Webster Dictionary as: “The act or process of comparing: as the representing of one thing or person as similar or like another, or the modification of an adjective or adverb to denote different levels of quality, quantity, or relation.”[6] Comparisons innately lend themselves to frequent abuse.
CATEGORIES OF MORAL EQUIVALENCE

False moral equivalence used against Israel may be categorized into nine main groups, shown below. These groups are:

The false moral equivalence between Israel and Nazi Germany;
Israel and South African apartheid;
Zionism and racism and its sub-categories Zionism and colonialism/imperialism, as well as Zionism and fascism, the Holocaust and the Nakba (Arabic for “The Catastrophe,” of 1948.)
False moral comparisons of murder and accidental death, comparisons of targeted killings of terrorists with intentional murder of civilians;
Equivalencies drawn between kidnapping of soldiers and imprisoning terrorists;
Presenting moral equivalence between Israel’s actions as a legitimate sovereign state and the illegitimate actions of terrorists.
A ninth category, “others,” includes demonization of Israel in ways which do not fit into the above categories, such as the moral equivalence drawn between anti-Semitism and Islamophobia, and the perceived parallels between Nazi brutality and the actions of their Allied opponents.

CATEGORY 1: ISRAEL AS A NAZI STATE

Heather Hackman of the Hackman Consulting Group apparently is a big deal in educational circles concerned with denouncing “white privilege.” School districts all over the country spend big bucks sending teachers and administrators for indoctrination into White Privilege Theory. The St. Paul public schools, for instance, have spent millions of dollars on this mission.

Blake Neff of the Daily Caller News Foundation has been attending the 17th Annual White Privilege Conference in Philadelphia, where Hackman enunciated a set of ideas that sound suspiciously close to white supremacy, and which made explicit the notion that teachers in government schools are now expected to be political indoctrinators more than teachers of any useful knowledge and skills.

A professional education consultant and teacher trainer argued at the White Privilege Conference (WPC) in Philadelphia that great teachers must also be liberal activists, and described in detail her goal for destroying the “white supremacist” nature of modern education. (snip)

On Friday, Hackman was given a platform at WPC to deliver a workshop with the lengthy title “No Freedom Unless We Call Out the Wizard Behind The Curtain: Critically Addressing the Corrosive Effects of Whiteness in Teacher Education and Professional Development.” The long title masked a simple thesis on Hackman’s part: Modern education is hopelessly tainted by white supremacy and the “white imperial gaze,” and the solution is to train prospective teachers in college to be activists as well as pedagogues.

In fact, Hackman argued teachers shouldn’t even bother teaching if they aren’t committed to promoting social justice in school.

TEL AVIV—Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu held a cabinet meeting in the Golan Heights for the first time on Sunday, declaring that Israel would never return the territory to Syria.

As another round of peace talks aimed at resolving the five-year Syrian conflict continued in Geneva, Mr. Netanyahu said it was time the international community recognized the Golan Heights as part of Israel.

“The time has come for the international community to recognize reality,” he said at the meeting’s opening. “Whatever is beyond the border, the boundary itself will not change.”

The international community doesn’t recognize Israeli sovereignty over the Golan Heights, and as in the Palestinian territories, considers settlement-building there illegal.

Mr. Netanyahu said he had spoken by phone Saturday with U.S. Secretary of State John Kerry to offer Israeli support for the United Nations-mediated talks as long as their outcome doesn’t threaten Israel.

A spokesman for the U.S. embassy in Tel Aviv declined to immediately comment on Mr. Netanyahu’s comments.

Western officials recognize the Golan Heights’s elevated position as strategically advantageous to Israel’s security as it overlooks Israeli towns and villages. Israel captured the roughly 500 square-mile territory from Syria in the 1967 Arab-Israeli war, and formally annexed the land in 1981. It also captured the Gaza Strip from Egypt in the war, ceding control in 2005, and East Jerusalem and the West Bank from Jordan.

Mr. Netanyahu, who used the special cabinet meeting to mark the first anniversary of his re-election, said more than 50,000 people now live in the Golan Heights, including thousands of members of the Syrian Druse minority who don’t recognize Israeli sovereignty over the land. CONTINUE AT SITE

Bethlehem’s Christian Arab leaders lobbied Israel against transferring the city to the Palestinian Authority. Thus, in 1993, on the eve of signing the Oslo Accord, the Christian mayor of Bethlehem, Elias Freij, urged Israel’s Prime Minister Rabin to annex Bethlehem into Greater Jerusalem – as it was under the Ottoman, British and Jordanian rule of the area – predicting that “transferring Bethlehem to the Palestinian Authority would relegate it to a town of many churches, but devoid of Christians.” Before Oslo, the Christian mayor of Beit Jala – Bethlehem’s twin town – Farah al-Araj, told the NY Times syndicated columnist, William Safire: “The PLO will force a wave of Christian emigration, making Belize in Central America a home for more Beit Jala Christians then left in Beit Jala.” In 1967, shortly following the Six Day War, then Christian Mayor of Bethlehem, Elias Bandak, warned Israel’s Defense Minister, Moshe Dayan: “An Israeli failure to annex Bethlehem into Greater Jerusalem would doom the city’s Christian character.”

Since the 1993 establishment of the Palestinian Authority, the Christian majorities of Ramallah – Mahmoud Abbas’ headquarters – Bethlehem and Beit Jala have been transformed into insignificant minorities, due to physical, social, economic, legal and political intimidation. More Christian emigrants from these towns reside in Latin America than Christians remaining there.

The violent discrimination of Christians has been a systematic feature of the Muslim/Arab societies. For instance, in Saudi Arabia, Christians were murdered, expelled or converted until the tenth century. Currently, non-Muslims cannot become Saudi citizens and Christians working in – or visiting – Saudi Arabia are not allowed to worship, or display Christian items (Bibles, crucifixes, statues, carvings, etc.), openly. While the Egyptian President, General Sisi, has attempted to minimize the traditional intimidation of Egypt’s Coptic Christian (10%) minority – which possesses ancient Pharaonic roots – the abduction of Coptic females has been routine and Copts face deep-seated discrimination in all walks of life. Moreover, conversion to Christianity is prohibited under Islam. While physical assaults on Coptic communities were a daily occurrence during the brief rule of the Muslim Brotherhood, it has become a monthly event under General Sisi.

In scathing letter, Israeli legal watchdog Shurat Hadin warns Rockefeller Brothers Fund that its support of groups that advocate boycotting Israel could cause the fund to be “considered complicit and as a participant in these groups’ illegal activities.”

The Rockefeller Brothers Fund has given anti-Israel BDS organizations hundreds of thousands of dollars, according to the Shurat Hadin Israel Law Center.

In a scathing letter to the RBF earlier this month, the Israeli legal watchdog group warned the RBF that its support of groups that advocate boycotting Israel could cause the fund to be “considered complicit and as a participant in these groups’ illegal activities.”

The fund, which belongs to the Rockefeller family, donates especially large sums of money to various institutions in Israel and abroad, which according to the allegations include Israeli and Palestinian human rights groups that publicly support the BDS movement.

Shurat Hadin claimed that in 2015 the RBF granted $140,000 to Jewish Voice for Peace; $20,000 to Zochrot; $50,000 to the American Friends Service Committee’s Israel program; and $100,000 to the Al-Shabaka organization.

In its letter to the RBF, Shurat Hadin wrote: “The BDS movement’s efforts constitute unlawful discrimination on the basis of national origin, race, and religion under the International Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination (‘Anti-Racism Convention’) and numerous U.S. federal and state statutes, including New York law. Funding organizations that promote BDS raises serious legal issues for RBF. Accordingly, we strongly advise you to consider whether RBF should continue to provide financial backing to these hate groups who promote BDS against Israel and Israeli companies, individuals, and products.”

We recently attended a lecture sponsored by AACI Netanya. The lecturer was American-Israeli Hank Citron, who divides his time between Manhattan and Netanya. A former history professor in New Jersey, Hank is a colorful character who, among other things, grew up in a Zionist household, the son of European immigrants; attended Hebrew University in the 1950s on a scholarship, after working his way across the Atlantic on a freighter; and boxed professionally to finance his PhD from New York University.

Hank (he and his wife Rebecca are good friends of ours) gave a 1-hour lecture without the need of notes, accompanied by appropriate photos of the life of Ze’ev Jabotinsky (1880-1940). One of the first, surprising, things we learned about this great leader, little known today outside of Israel, is that there are more monuments and streets in Israel named for him than for Theodor Herzl, Chaim Weizmann, or David Ben-Gurion, all of whom are much better known internationally.

Hank put Jabotinsky’s greatest accomplishment into perspective. He reminded us that the Third Jewish Revolt against the Romans, led by the messianic Simon bar Kochba (132-136 CE), resulted in a horrific defeat for the Jews. As a result, Jews renounced armed revolt or self defense as a nation, losing control their homeland. Jabotinsky, singleminded in his devotion to Zionism, was the one who rekindled the idea of a Jewish army in the first decades of the 20th century, the first step back towards Jewish nationhood.

Born in cosmopolitan Odessa on the shores of the Black Sea, Jabotinsky enjoyed a secular upbringing in what was the fourth largest city in Imperial Russia (now within the borders of Ukraine). While his was not a religious family, Jabotinsky was Hebrew-literate from an early age. His wealthy family rejected socialism, so it isn’t surprising that Jabotinsky wasn’t attracted to Social Zionism, the Zionist stream which later was led by his bitter competitor, David Ben-Gurion.

Jabotinsky was very intelligent, a prodigy in fact, who became a linguist and wrote and orated in eight languages. Initially he was inclined towards journalism and the theatre. At age 17 he went to Rome, quickly learned the language and became a journalist there while earning a law degree. Although he had already become an accomplished author and poet, Jabotinsky soon directed his talents to pursuing his Zionist ideals.

The trigger for this change was the 1903 Kishinev massacre, which aroused universal condemnation and protest, precipitating a major emigration of Jews from Russia. Jabotinsky publicized the pogrom worldwide. By that time, he had already joined the Zionist movement and had become recognized as a powerful speaker and leader. At the Sixth (and last) Zionist Congress in 1903, Jabotinsky met Theodor Herzl, whom he greatly admired.

This new special edition of the Glazov Gang was joined by Nonie Darwish, the author of The Devil We Don’t Know.

The discussion focused on Islamic Prayer as Intimidation, analyzing why a Muslim would scream “Allahu Akbar” on an airplane.

Don’t miss it!http://jamieglazov.com/2016/04/17/islamic-prayer-as-intimidation-on-the-glazov-gang/

Last month, during a panel discussion at the UN Commission on the Status of Women, I made the unexceptionable observation that Bruce Jenner is just a dude in a dress, and the social justice warriors nearly lost their minds.

Music critic Michael Walsh, author of the recent book, The Devil’s Pleasure Palace, explained how art, as well as conversation, falls victim to political correctness.

“There is no more humor when you cannot make fun of anybody, and Hollywood comedies suffer from that greatly.” He cited the recent and highly-publicized example of Olympic athlete Bruce Jenner coming out as transgender and recalled how a man dressed in a ball gown was played for laughs in Mel Brooks’ film “The Producers.” “Is that Bruce Jenner or is that Mel Brooks comedy? Well, today, could Mel Brooks make that movie?”

But today half the country lives in a fantasy world in which a short white guy can “self-identify” as a tall Chinese woman and no one will tell him he’s mad as a hatter:

The university campus is becoming ever more increasingly hostile to both Jews and Israel. From what I have witnessed and experienced, I believe it is no side effect, but rather part of a deliberate and well planned strategy. We are witnessing an entryist operation.

In March, in the period around ‘Israeli Apartheid week’, I attended an impressive one-day conference at the London School of Economics. It was jointly organised by ‘Olive’, ‘FOSIS’, and ‘Friends of Al Aqsa’. The event, was titled ‘from Johannesburg to Jerusalem’. One of the speakers at the event was Max Blumenthal, who apparently got on stage to create conspiracy theories, compare Israel to ISIS and to praise Hamas.
The university pull factor

During the day, there were two workshops. One that was of particular interest to me, went about explaining how to create and promote BDS campaigns on campus. The strategy was broken down into 7 parts. The most important was persuading your university to create a scholarship for Palestinians. This is what was said:

“The Best people to lead a group or society on campus are Palestinians. There is no one that can articulate better to you the realities of occupation and who can make that argument better than Palestinians. To get Palestinians on campus, from the Gaza Strip, from the West Bank and from Israel what you need is to convince your university in setting up scholarships. Right, and that requires lobbying, and that requires organising and actually that can also come in the form of fundraising every year.

At Sheffield we get a fee waiver ever year on a Palestinian student. Right, and then we have to fundraise for accommodation and living. Although actually now the university pay for that as well, but originally we had to. But what that actually meant was you could build up long relationships with academics who pay standing orders and other things and you build up a network of individuals for contributing towards your scholarship”

So that is the ‘pull’ factor. I am sure that when they lobby the university for the scholarship, they plead humanitarian concern. They push the necessity of saving the student from the ‘oppressive and brutal occupation’. In reality they are lobbying to persuade the university to finance their political cause. Whichever way you consider this, people on this side are actively seeking new recruits from ‘Palestine’ to promote BDS. Then asking the university to pay for it.
The university push factor

But I wondered at the time about the ‘push’. Who are these students? A Palestinian student from Gaza who makes the application, is he merely a lucky applicant who is given a life changing opportunity? Or is there a ‘push’ factor, where Palestinian movements have created a network carefully selecting potential candidates, assisting them in their application and training them prior to their departure?

It would be an astonishing miss if this is not the reality. The Palestinian cause on this side is desperate to lobby for the scholarship. They have a specific goal in mind. Are they going to do all this work, go to all this trouble, only to find they end up with a Palestinian who isn’t capable of presenting their case? Consider Gaza, given Hamas has control over the propaganda there. Are Hamas selecting or filtering the applicants? Are our university funds being used to further the Hamas cause?

http://www.jpost.com/Breaking-News/John-Kerry-Joe-Biden-to-speak-at-J-Street-conference-451435

US Secretary of State John Kerry will deliver remarks at the J Street 2016 National Gala on Monday at the Ronald Reagan Building and International Trade Center.
Additionally, Vice President Joe Biden will also deliver remarks. This year’s honorees include Ambassador Samuel Kaplan, Ambassador Louis Susman, and Ambassador Alan Solomont.

The diplojerks are:
Samuel Louis Kaplan was United States Ambassador to Morocco. He was appointed ambassador in 2009 by President Barack Obama

Alan D. Solomont is the former United States Ambassador to Spain and Andorra. He was selected for the post by President Barack Obama. Solomont serves on the boards of numerous leftist organizations including The Jewish Fund for Justice, The New Israel Fund, Israel Policy Forum

Louis B. Susman is an American lawyer, retired investment banker, and the former United States Ambassador to the United Kingdom. Appointed by Obama after the statue of Churchill was returned.