« Scary-Voice Man Gets a New Gig | Home | The theology of freedom »
April 05, 2007
Brit Tzedek V'Shalom doesn't impress LA shul
Allyson Rowen Taylor of Stand With Us attended a speech by one of the leaders of Brit Tzedek V'Shalom at Valley Beth Shalom Synagogue, one of the largest in the LA area and pulpit of author Rabbi Harold Shulweis. BTvS promotes the Baker-Hamilton Report, sponsors "Combatants for Peace" (which we wrote about here) and holds Israel responsible for everything that happens to the Palestinians (being a classic case of Richard Landes' Masochistic Omnipotent Syndrome). But their positions are even more ridiculous than I thought.
Allyson's report (via email) is emotional but contains some facts:
I monitored Marcia Freedman, from Brit Tsedek v' Shalom last Saturday, spewin her pro-Palestinian, anti-Occupation, ususal blame Israel stuff at Valley Beth Shalom Synagogue. Needless to say, we had about 60 elderly people who stayed for this and it was a joy to hear them attack this woman with pointed questions that she tried to defend.
She refused to acknowlege any hate being taught by the Palestinians, and said our unilateral withdrawal caused tumult in the Gaza region, as we did not give them enough time to prepare how to govern themselves. She said the kids being taught by hate videos will not have an impact on the future. Without boring you more, It was good I went, I asked her why she felt :
1. The targeted killing of Sheik Yassin was wrong, as she stated on her website, and
2. Why can Arabs live within Jewish borders, but Jews cannot live within Arab borders???
Imagine the answers, words like "occupation" , "humiliation" "IDF brutality" and all the other tag lines you have all heard. The room groaned, and when an 89 year old woman stomped out on her walker, speaking loudly that this who issue on Shabbas was a "shanda," others who were more able bodied walked with her, and then the room proceeded to walk out. This was delicious!
I emailed Allyson about Freedman's assertion that "our unilateral withdrawel caused tumult in the Gaza region, as we did not give them enough time to prepare how to govern themselves."
So it's bad if Israel leaves and it's bad if Israel stays. Israel bad bad bad.
Did anyone call her on that?
Allyson replied:
Judith, We were only allowed to ask questions at the end of the event. We did ask her the question of Israel bad for "occupation" and Israel bad for "unilateral withdrawal". Her response was we did not give them time. and then she said that the Israelis allowed them to drown in their own "shit" however she said "s blank blank t", and that this is the worst thing we can do.
Rabbi Feinstein seemed embarrassed by her statements, and though he tried to justify it as an opportunity for all the different types of beliefs that Jews hold, he gave her credibility by allowing her to speak at Valley Beth Shalom. This is a very large, influential congregation, and Rabbi Shulweis (sp?), known for his left wing views, however, has been a supporter of Israel. In fact, outside of the Synagogue there is a sign that says "We stand with Israel" unlike many of the JCRC's and ,many reformed shuls that say "Save Darfur". WHile Darfur is important it is not the primary issue Jews should be concerned with at this time.
Many of the members of the VBS that heard this were very upset, and they will make their voices heard. Alan Howard, who joined me is writing a letter to the Rabbi, and I will be doing it as well. I am a believer in free speech, but it was a shanda to have this [woman] speak on the steps of the bima, criticizing the IDF, Zionists, Religious Jews, and "Settlers" for all the problems that lie in the MIddle East.
I still wonder what BTvS thinks Israel should have been doing in Gaza to "give the Palestinians time." And whether Israel could do anything that these people would not characterize as "occupation" and "oppression." We all know "democracy-building" has a bad name on the Left, and the Gazans already had a chaotic thugocracy run by Hamas, fed by EU and UN "no strings attached" funding. So what does BTvS want instead - for the US to install a strongman? Any candidates, Marcia?
PS Here is BTvS's "rabbinic cabinet." I recognize way too many names on that list.
Judith | 04/05/07 at 06:12 PM | Categories: - Gaza and Palestine
Trackback Pings
TrackBack URL for this entry:
http://www.keshertalk.com/cgi-bin/mtb.cgi/6414
Comments
i assume that her reference to "drowning in their own shit" is to the sewage tsunami. this kind of talk is breathtakingly racist in that this woman holds the palestinians to no standards. they have no agency, no choice, no ability to act -- everything that goes wrong is our fault. the white jew's burden.
what's changed, and is great, is the audience response. about time that people spoke out against such grotesque comments, against people playing out what one can only imagine are profound personal psychological conflicts in public at other people's expense -- in this case, both the israelis and the palestinians.
ralph the bald | April 5, 2007 08:35 PM
I am a member of VBS and have been involved with the shul for more than 25 years. There are quite a few members who were more than a little irritated about this.
Daniel Pipes spoke there this past February to a crowd that was quite large. I have no problem characterizing the shul as being very pro-Israel.
I still wonder what BTvS thinks Israel should have been doing in Gaza to "give the Palestinians time." And whether Israel could do anything that these people would not characterize as "occupation" and "oppression."
Arafat had from 1994 till the day he died at the end of 2004 (10 years not enough?) to learn how to govern, as did the rest of his clique, Abbas and co.
They sure learned quickly how to apply one man one vote ...
Cynic ![[TypeKey Profile Page]](http://www.keshertalk.com/nav-commenters.gif)
| April 6, 2007 11:51 AM
"While Darfur is important it is not the primary issue Jews should be concerned with at this time."
I happen to agree. And yet when people complain about human rights abuses in the Occupied Territories a not infrequent response from supporters of Israel (including IIRC on this blog at various times) is that focusing on such violations in the OT and - at least by comparison - ignoring them elsewhere is symptomatic of antisemitism.
So ignoring Darfur and concentrating on the OT is good when a supporter of Israel reccommends it to Jews, but bad bad bad when a critic of Israel recommends it, to Jews or anyone else. Forgive me, but that hardly seems more logical than Ms Freedman's peculiar position that the occupation of Gaza was bad, and the withdrawal from Gaza was bad. Unless Ms Taylor's recommendation is just that Jews must concentrate on human rights abuses by Palestinians and ignore everything else, but if anyone mentions human rights abuses by Israelis the correct response is to point to Darfur and scream "Jew-haters!"? You're more up to speed on the Herzliya Hasbara Handbook than I am: is that the currently recommended diversionary tactic?
"So ignoring Darfur and concentrating on the OT is good when a supporter of Israel reccommends it to Jews, but bad bad bad when a critic of Israel recommends it, to Jews or anyone else. Forgive me, but that hardly seems more logical..."
You're forgiven. It's logical. Here's why: IN many contexts, when a Jew brings up ANY gross human rights violation by (Other than Israel), anywhere, it is seen as part of the Great Jewish Conspiracy: "the only reason you're mentioning the 400,000 deaths in Darfur is to distract us from your daily crimes in Gaza." Or, if a Jew points out the reality of Darfur, that it just happens to be Arabs doing the butchery, it will be seen as just another example of Ant-Arab propaganda on the part of Jews. Hence, while Darfur should not be ignored, it gains far more "street cred" when discussed by non-Jews. Sad but reality.
Indeed Darfur should be a primary issue everywhere. It is a huge, in-your-face reality check for the world: If you are in dire peril of genocide and the principal "Imperialist" nations, the US, UK, or France, are not willing to send troops to save you, nobody else will save you. You will die, probably in horrific circumstances, accept it. Troops and "Aid workers" from elsewhere will stand around and watch your family get butchered and your village burned. Then they will have a fund raising concert and feel better about it.
The people of Darfur will still be dead, of course, but "awareness has been raised". Oh goody.
But you see, the way the world works (or doesn't, these days) it takes a non-Jew to say that and have it mean something.
Ben
Ben | April 16, 2007 09:24 AM
