This Ad Isn't Helping Israel, Guys

‘Killing Jews is Worship’ posters will soon appear on NYC subways and buses

So first off, I don't understand the judge's decision. Must the MTA accept all advertising? So if I want to create an ad featuring a naked woman straddling an armadillo with the message, "Time to ride the horny armadillo," the MTA can't say no? They've just got to roll with it?

I'm all for free speech, but there's nothing in the 1st Amendment that says a publisher HAS TO publish anything it receives. Otherwise, my very convincing article about how we actually evolved from Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles who were warped back in time (as alluded to in the classic video game, "Turtles in Time") would have been published in the New York Times.

Secondly, Washington Post reporter Michael Miller writes, "Making the case all the stranger is that the posters are not the work of an Islamist group, but rather a pro-Israel organization." But is the "American Freedom Defense Initiative" even pro-Israel? Because this ad does nothing to convince anyone to support Israel. It does the exact opposite.

The most convincing argument among liberals inclined against Israel is that "the country is not a place of freedom and justice, but a place where Arabs and Muslims are subjugated, segregated and subjected to discrimination and prejudice." All this ad does is, well, reveal that this supposedly pro-Israel group believes "all Muslims are terrorists." Which plays into the hands of Israel's critics. If critics call you a country founded on prejudice... maybe don't launch an ad campaign that highlights your prejudicial viewpoint?

If you want to place an ad convincing people to support Israel, then why not create an ad like this:

That took me all of 2 seconds, so excuse the clunky language. My ad team will refine it in our brainstorming sessions. But hell, it makes a much better point. It's easy to say Israel shouldn't exist, that Israel is an apartheid state. But what do you want instead? Gaza?

What other country in the Middle East would you hold up as an example of equal human rights? What other place could an Arab and a Jew even consider having a friendship? That's the best argument for Israel-- its government may be a right-wing nut factory, its rights record sometimes spotty, its military sometimes overzealous (sounds kinda like a country closer to home) but Israel is the only functional democracy in the Middle East that doesn't punish its people with Sharia law and allows freedom of expression (Israel is the only country in the region to have a free press, according to freedomhouse.org). It's not an evil country, hanging gay people, stoning women, arresting and torturing dissenters. It's an imperfect country, but so is the United States.

And yet the American Freedom Defense Initiative's ad plays up the viewpoint of the far-right-wingers, the messianic settlers, many of whom--just like the far-right-wingers in America---are xenophobic, racist, bigots. There are some people in Israel who believe all Muslims are terrorists, just like a lot of people in Texas do. But they're not representative of Israel. As much as the American Freedom Defense Initiative's ad makes them out to be.

I looked into this group (again, something that took me 2 seconds) and I have to disagree with reporter Michael Miller's characterization of the AFDI as a "pro-Israel group." Up until recently, the organization was actually called "Stop Islamization of America," which, as the name suggests, had little to do with supporting Israel and everything to do with spreading anti-Islamic rhetoric. Knowing this, it's clear the ad isn't aimed at convincing anyone to support Israel. It's aimed at spreading anti-Islamic hatred. Something the judge in this case should have realized.

If I were the MTA, I'd defy the judge's order. But since I'm not, I can only urge this. Deface every one of these stupid ads you see. Tear them, write over them in permanent marker, cover them in stickers. Because this ad is not how to support Israel. Not if our desire is for peace and prosperity for both Israelis and Palestinians.

Hate may grab attention. But love wins hearts.

Benjamin Netanyahu's Unsustainable Bubble

The most dangerous threat to Israel isn't the Palestinians, or Iran. The gravest threat is Benjamin Netanyahu.

I've written before about my skepticism that Netanyahu really believes in the peace process. A day away from elections that could cast him out of power, he removed all doubt. There will be no two-state solution as far as he's concerned. Ever.

The mask is off now. For all of Netanyahu's protestations that Israel lacks a true partner in the peace process, that Fatah is corrupt and powerless, that Hamas will quickly undermine any deal-- it's clear now that Netanyahu was never paying anything but lip service to the idea of a peace plan. From his public statements, it's clear he believes that there can never be a Palestinian state that doesn't jeopardize Israel's security.


What then, is the answer he proposes? It's very clear from the policies he's supported as Prime Minister.

1. Restrict Palestinians' travel and ability to organize.

2. Strengthen and expand Iron Dome to prevent rocket attacks.

3. Secure borders with walls and high-tech monitoring.

4. Expand settlements to establish buffer zones and drive Palestinians out of strategic areas.

5. Use American money and diplomatic power to keep other countries out of it.

Netanyahu's 5-points of darkness security strategy, from his perspective, and the perspective of many Israelis, has worked so far. Israel is suffering far less casualties from terrorism than it suffered in the past. It faces no real conventional military threat. It's safer to live in Israel now than at any point during its history. Basically, Netanyahu has enclosed Israel in a bubble, and he doesn't care much about what's happening outside of it.

Yet it's a remarkably cruel and short-sighted strategy. The long-term downside to living in a bubble  should be evident to anyone who bothers to think about the future-- for Israel and the Palestinians.

With no Palestinian state on the table, Israel continues its control of the Palestinian territories, expands Jewish settlements, ignores the basic needs of the Palestinians and crowds them into ever worsening conditions-- effectively confirming the beliefs of all those who accuse Israel of being an apartheid state. Meanwhile, Israel isolates itself diplomatically and ostracizes its only reliable ally, the United States. Billions of dollars are wasted on maintaining security structures. The Palestinian territory remains a thorn in Israel's side that erupts in flares of violence, followed by severe, disproportionate crackdowns that resemble, more and more, acts of ethnic cleansing (drawing international condemnation and provoking acts of antisemitism towards Jews worldwide). In this scenario, "peace" only comes when Israelis effectively subjugate the Palestinians to the point where their population numbers and passions no longer pose a threat and the territory can be officially absorbed into Israel. And that's really the best case scenario for how this all shakes out-- it's a long, violent, conflict-riddled road to even get to that horrifically xenophobic vision of the future. It's much more likely that eliminating peace as a viable option ends up further radicalizing both sides until an all-out war erupts and forces other countries to intervene.

That's what most of us Jews have sworn would never happen. We're not the Nazis. We've suffered thousands of years of persecution, we would never seek to decimate another group. "We don't want the Palestinians gone, we want them to stop attacking us." That's always been the noble refrain: Israel doesn't want to destroy the Palestinians, the way many of them want to destroy Israel.

The only justification for Israel's management of the Palestinian territories has been to assure Israel's security while working to establish permanent peace. If you ditch the second part, then you basically concede the argument to all the antisemites and Israel-haters--"You're right, we don't want the Palestinians here."

Is that the Israel that Israelis want? To drop the noble intentions of living side by side in peace, and instead declare manifest destiny--Israel, and only Israel, from the Mediterranean to the Jordan? Israel in a bubble, blowing bigger and bigger, while those standing in the way get smothered?

That may be Netanyahu's plan, but we'll soon see if the voters agree. Right now, polls have Netanyahu trailing his more moderate rivals. That gives me some hope that the noble cause is not yet lost.

After all, bubbles, as we know, have a tendency to pop.

-----
Update 3/18: Well, Bibi appears to have enough support to form a coalition. Jonathan Chait published an article today that echoes my concerns:

"Netanyahu’s comments present a coherent and chilling vision of his long-term strategy. His intention is to maintain singular Israeli control in perpetuity over the entire territory that the early Zionists were once happy to partition into two states. This course will eventually lead to pressure for Palestinians to gain a democratic voice within the institutions that control their lives, but Netanyahu treats that as illegitimate, as well. He proposes to snuff out every peaceful outlet for Arab political aspirations."

Somehow, America survived the lunacy of George W. Bush (even though his actions gave the world ISIS and destroyed our economy). Hopefully, Israel will survive Netanyahu.

Israel Is Not A Threat To Peace, Hamas Is



I shouldn't have to write the statement above. It should be obvious. Israel is a democratic nation with a long history of attempts to make peace with its neighbors. Hamas is a terrorist organization with a long history of blowing people up in nightclubs and buses.

But recent events have even got Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama blaming the Israelis for derailing the peace process. And I wonder just what Barack and Hillary are basing that on. That Israelis are building some new houses in a part of Jersusalem that would most likely be part of Israel anyway if a peace plan came to pass?

Let's get the facts straight. The Jerusalem suburb of Ramat Shlomo is NOT an Arab suburb. It's not a Palestinian suburb. Ramat Shlomo didn't exist before 1995. It was built and settled by Haredi Jews. It is NOT in the disputed East Jerusalem territory, which Palestinians want for their capital. It might be close by, but it is not in any territory that was once settled heavily by Arabs.

Furthermore, Hamas, as justification for their "Day of Rage" (which involved rock throwing at soldiers and general rioting), claimed that the Jews built a synagogue next to the Al-Asqa Mosque, as part of a fiendish plan to eventually annex the mosque territory and destroy it. Nevermind the fact that the Al-Asqa mosque is more than four football fields away, on top of the Temple Mount (which Israel has placed in the hands of the Muslims ever since its independence), that the synagogue was built in the JEWISH quarter of Jerusalem, and that the synagogue replaces the one built in the 1800s that was desecrated and destroyed by Jordan in 1948. When Israel rebuilt the synagogue, they maintained, rather than destroyed, the Muslim minaret that the Arabs had built on the site.

So what has Israel done wrong? They've built more houses for Jews in a place where Palestinians NEVER lived, in a place where more than 18,000 Jews already live. They've built a synagogue in the JEWISH quarter of Jerusalem, where a synagogue already stood. My God! What ANIMALS!!!!!

Hillary and Obama have to get their facts straight. They reacted to a pro-Hamas press release, and by declaring Israel to be out-of-line, gave Palestinian extremists ammunition to rally their cause. It would be a non-issue if Obama had said, "We're looking at the new building activity and examining whether it runs afoul of the peace process." Instead, he regurgitated the first thing he was told by some anti-Semite.

I just returned from Israel. In Jerusalem, I saw a city where anyone who wants to worship can worship in the way they please, without the threat of violence. I walked through the Muslim quarter, where a mob of little arab children, fresh from school, ran through the streets chanting "Allah Akbar," "God Is Great," with not one Israeli soldier batting an eye (even when a few of the kids spat on and pushed members of our tour group). I witnessed an Israeli government that strives to create a place where all religions can operate freely and pray in peace. Even when some of those people throw rocks at them.

Can we say the Palestinians would do the same? If, when, they receive East Jerusalem, will it be a place where any tourist from a non-Muslim nation can ever go? Will it be a place where any Christian or Jewish ruins or holy sites will be safe from desecration and destruction?

We've seen how they respond to a slight that wasn't even a slight. How will they respond once the Israeli soldiers pull out, and there's no one stopping these riots from exploding?

Personally, I fear for the day. And any reasonable person should too.

You tell me: Is Ramat Shlomo (A) in EAST Jerusalem?

A Two State Solution Is The Only Solution For Israel

Stephen Walt of Foreign Policy magazine lays out the case simply. The only way Israel can continue to exist is the two-state solution: Israel right beside a Palestinian state. Anything less, and Israel risks becoming a country much like South Africa, willfully subjugating a group of people in order to maintain power.

There is concern that Benjamin Netanyahu, Prime Minister of Israel, does not want a two-state solution. After all, he's one of Israel's most prominent right-wing hawks. But Walt's article points out that an Israel divided into Israelis and Arabs cannot stand. The only way Israel can remain a Jewish nation is if the majority of its people remain Jewish. And the only way to do that, outside of Nazi-like relocation or genocide, is to cut off the parts of Israel which aren't Jewish, and let those parts form a Palestinian state. Two states, side by side, or no Israel at all.

So if a two-state solution is inevitable, assuming the leaders in Israel want to maintain the Jewish state, then all efforts must be made now to make it happen. For years this has been cast as the Palestinian fight-- they're the ones "fighting for freedom." But perhaps it is Israel, and Jews everywhere, that should be fighting for a Palestian state.

It's a radical idea-- that Jews should help the Palestinians. But perhaps its the only idea that makes sense. The Arab countries have paid lip service to the Palestinian cause. With all their money from oil, they'd rather build show cities like Dubai than build roads in Palestine. Jews have been generous to Israel, but perhaps their aid is misplaced. As my guide on my Israel trip said: "Israel doesn't need money. It needs Jews." And while I'm sure he didn't mean "give your money to the Palestinians," maybe that's where aid should focus-- to hasten the day when handing the keys of the West Bank and Gaza Strip to Palestine won't be an unmitigated disaster.

After all, a healthy, stable Palestinian state is in Israel's best interests. And if that state owes a debt of gratitude to Israeli and Jewish outreach, it's less inclined to act violently against the remaining land of Israel.

We can be cynics, and say that the Palestinians will use their own country as a staging ground to "finish the job" and destroy Israel forever(if you've ever been to Israel, you know how tenuous a strip of land the remaining Jewish state would encompass). Certainly the Gazans have shown what happens when Israel leaves and the crazier parts of the Palestinian cause take over. But its clear that Israel can't continue to be an occupying force, no matter how benevolent it tries to be. At some point, a Palestinian state has to be created... and it might as well be created on firm ground, on favorable terms, by an act of Israeli generosity.

Perhaps instead of putting the nation's energies towards expanding already thin Jewish settlements into hostile territories, Israel should implore the world to contribute to building a stable nation of Palestine. Ask the Arab countries first. Lets see if they put their money where their mouth is. Once the proper infrastructure is built, then Israel can begin the troublesome, more difficult task of making a peaceful transition of power.

Unrealistic? One needs only to look at the Balkans, once torn by hatred between ethic groups, which now has achieved a measure of stability. Separate ethnically-based nations can be carved out of one mixed bag, but it can't be a haphazard job. Palestine isn't nearly developed enough to stand on its own yet. The economic state of the Palestinians must be improved before they can be trusted to make decisions based on the common good, and not age old grudges. And it will take commitment from the people who have the most to lose--the Jews-- to make it happen.