Since 1948, when Israel came into being, the Palestinians have rejected peace negotiations eight times, and a two-state solution at least five times. The most favorable was the 2000 Camp David Summit, when Ehud Barak offered Yasser Arafat two states with East Jerusalem as the capital of Palestine and a land bridge between Gaza and the West Bank. That was rejected by Arafat, and anyone with more than a few neurons recognizes who was responsible for the agreement’s demise. The reason was simple: Arafat simply did not want a two-state solution.
Here we have Michelle Goldberg, a New York Times staff writer, making a deeply misleading argument about why anti-Zionism isn’t always anti-Semitism. And indeed, I agree with that premise, but not with Goldberg’s interpretation of what has happened and what’s happening now. The kind of “anti-Zionism” Goldberg apparently favors is indeed anti-Semitism, for it’s a recipe for the elimination of Israel and a bloodbath of Jews.
First, Goldberg notes that both Rashida Tlaib and Ilhan Omar, the two new female Muslim Congresswomen, are in favor of the Boycott, Divestment, Sanctions movement, which is true. Tlaib, however, didn’t endorse BDS until after she was elected (that’s a slimy move), and even before her election she wasn’t in favor of even a two-state solution to the Israel/Palestine problem.
Goldberg seems to favor BDS as a way to solve the issue—by pressuring Israel. But she doesn’t dwell on the fact that BDS, and…
View original post 987 more words
Utopia, you are standing in it! 
Recent Comments