I struggle to understand why the EUTB statement apologizes, also, to the Palestinian community.
Had they disinvited a Palestinian food truck because activists were mad at the PA, the, yes, absolutely apologize the the Palestinian community.
4/ Had they done that, an apology to Palestinians shouldn't be accompanied by an apology to the Jewish or Israeli community. They didn't do that. They invited a Palestinian food truck.
They disinvited Israeli Jews. They acknowledged that was wrong. Don't fear a direct apology.
5/ Back to the original point: Boycotts and protests have always been for both good and for bad causes.
There are, of course, well-known cases of people boycotting Jews, and insisting it was for a good cause, and it being for a bad cause.
6/ Some people seem to have a hard time recognizing bad causes and bad protesters when they're not dressed in jackboots or carrying tiki torches. Doubly so when the bad actors claim to be of the Left.
7/ So not only will we have to accept that we'll be boycotted or picketed for refraining from bigotry. We also should internalize that things to the left of other things (or purporting to be) aren't necessarily pure.
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
2. Rocket attacks on Israeli civilians, and sniper attacks on Israeli soldiers, are characterized as expressions of Palestinian "impatience" with Israel. camera.org/article/in-ny-…
3. Hamas rockets that target and successfully kill Jewish civilians are called "stray rockets," as if they misfired and unintentionally struck their target. camera.org/article/in-ny-…
A prominent US media figure does the same. (And @rezaaslan didn't under his retweet after people informed him of the facts.)
Aaand @imraansiddiqi seems to have deleted his tweet. Now that he seems to acknowledge the info he shared was incorrect, maybe his Twitter followers deserve to be informed?
1/ Hi @IKershner, could you clarify by what criteria the @nytimes classifies historical attacks on Tel Amal as "resistance"?
Opening fire on Holocaust survivors living and farming legally in their village is terrorism, or at the least an "attack."
2/ Just yesterday, those perusing the @nytimes read about Jewish "resistance" fighters who fought Nazis in death camps. That's not the same as, e.g., killing an innocent Jew as he was tending the fields. jta.org/1937/11/19/arc…
3/ The paper doesn't need to call the attackers "brigands," as it did in a contemporaneous (April 1937) report on an assault on Tel Amal. That sounds a bit dated.
But it could certainly use the word "attack" instead of the noble-sounding "resistance." @IKershner
1/ There's a letter circulating "from journalists, to journalists" that calls for abandoning journalistic objectivity in favor of anti-Israel activism.
Most signers are from fringe sites (Jewish Currents, the Intercept, Mondoweiss), but some (!) are mainstream news reporters.
2/ The names in that latter group—the handful from The @BuzzFeed, @washingtonpost, @latimes—should amount to a list of reporters that news organizations promising objective, impartial, and fair reporting should bar from touching anything related to Israel, Hamas, or the conflict.
3/ There's nothing at all noteworthy about journalists from Al Jazeera/AJ+ signing the letter:
For some strange reason, Al Jazeera has cult status in some Western circles.
It shouldn't. It should be viewed with contempt.
Here's an updated "greatest hits" list to underscore that point:
2/ To set the stage:
Most recently, a the network accepted an award from Hamas, an antisemitic terror organization known for its suicide bombing attacks on Jewish civilians, for what Hamas viewed as Al Jazeera's excellent coverage.
3/ Al Jazeera once threw a birthday party for Samir Kuntar, a Lebanese terrorist convicted of bludgeoning to death a 4-year-old Israeli girl and shooting her father.