Home » Nina Bassat, Politics and Media, Recent Posts

JCCV to Disaffiliate AJDS?

March 28, 2013 – 8:04 pm232 Comments
One of the brands AJDS wants people to boycott.

One of the brands AJDS wants people to boycott.

In response to the launch of a campaign advocating an economic boycott of Israeli settlements by the Australian Jewish Democratic Society (AJDS), Nina Bassat, President of the Jewish Community Council of Victoria (JCCV), has suggested in the following statement that they might disaffiliate the AJDS.

The JCCV totally repudiates the AJDS campaign- ‘Don’t Buy Settlement Products’. Whilst the JCCV recognizes that its affiliates have the right to formulate their own policies, this campaign is repugnant to the long-standing policies of the JCCV and indeed to those of the majority of our community. The philosophical differences between the JCCV and the AJDS are such that I propose to bring for discussion to our next meeting the future of AJDS as a JCCV affiliate.

Below is the AJDS press release from earlier in the week announcing the launch of their campaign:

The Australian Jewish Democratic Society (AJDS), a progressive Jewish organisation based in Melbourne, is pleased to launch “Don’t Buy From the Settlements”: a campaign encouraging Australian Jews to avoid buying products made in settlements located in the Occupied Territories.

The campaign was launched online today at www.dontbuysettlementproducts.org.au as well as on Facebook.

Israeli settlements are seen around the world as a major obstacle to creating peace between Israelis and Palestinians. One way to take a stand against the harm they create is not to buy the products they produce. This sends a clear message that we will not be complicit in the settlement program.

The AJDS launched this campaign as the Jewish festival of Passover, which is commonly known as a festival of freedom, begins. On Passover we remember that Jews were once slaves in Biblical Egypt.  This year the AJDS is putting a call out to the Jewish community asking them  to join a long history of people who have fought for freedom, for both Jews and for non-Jews.

AJDS executive member Dr Jordy Silverstein says: “not buying products from settlements will not work on its own, but it is one small step that we can take. When we add in the possibility of sharing knowledge about what the settlements mean and what they do, together with the capability to have these difficult conversations about what kind of Israel we want to create, we can work alongside Palestinians, Israelis, and people throughout the diasporas to create an exciting, liberating future.”

The AJDS looks forward to working with peoples throughout the various Australian Jewish and non-Jewish communities to cease buying settlement products. We are excited to join new conversations about what kind of Israel we can help to create.

For more information, including a list of products that are manufactured in settlements, and an explanation of some of the many different reasons why settlements are a problem, please visit our website at www.dontbuysettlementproducts.org.au

 

Print Friendly

232 Comments »

  • Jake says:

    I have always wondered why the AJDS was admitted as an affiliate to the JCCV in the first instance ?
    Perhaps someone can shed some light .

  • Mike Gold says:

    What a shame the JCCV is taking such harsh action. We need to accept that there are different ways to support Israel. These people are working for the best for Israel — and as much as one may disagree with their particular action (I sympathise, but disagree) it does not make sense to alienate them and exclude them from the communal conversation.

    If this goes through it will be a huge victory for one part of the community — the part that wants the community all to themselves at the exclusion of all others. People may disagree with the AJDS campaign, but even more they will disagree with a small group of Jews (largely male, Nina almost exclusively excepted) deciding who is and is not part of the community. People will disengage entirely from the community. This is a great way to turn people off communal service, and the community at large.

    It’s already happening — as much as Nina is a wonderful lady with decades of positive service to the community, it made no sense to me that there was no one younger and fresher who could be brought into the role. Nina had her turn, and it was time for someone new — but there was no one else. It’s already started, and this will only exacerbate it further. For the sake of the community, JCCV, don’t do this. You’ll ruin it for the rest of us.

  • Mandi Katz says:

    I don’t support the AJDS campaign at all (settlement product boycotts seem wrong to me on many levels) but I think it would be wrong if the JCCV were to exclude the AJDS.

    Many Israelis do not buy products produced across the green line. Many more, do not support boycotts of settlement goods but fiercely opposed what they saw as undemocratic legislation to make such boycotts criminal.

    Dissent makes us uncomfortable. It’s convenient and sometimes politically popular to silence it, but Mike Gold commenting above is correct – excluding the AJDS will do more harm than good.

  • Leo says:

    Boycotting settlement products may seem like a great idea… but, what’s the idea?

    To economically destroy settlements at which 10,000 Palestinians work and feed their families from?

    Or is it to help Palestinians establish a state based on gender apartheid through Sharia law?

    Our prerogative as humans, is to think beyond the immediate and not jump from the frying pan and into the fire.

    Disaffiliate the AJDS. The rotten core of appeasement rears its head in the Jewish community but it is not representative of any part of it that’s worth a damn.

  • Harold Zwier says:

    Jake, the AJDS was admitted as an affiliate in October 1993 on the eve of the signing of the Oslo Accords. I was at the JCCV plenum meeting on that evening and remember that Isi Leibler, who was visiting Australia at the time, said that if the JCCV did not accept the AJDS as a member (it had failed to gain the 2/3 majority in its first attempt, after being invited to join by the executive of the Victorian Jewish Board of Deputies [as the JCCV was then known]), it would be the laughing stock of the Jewish world.

    Over the years the AJDS has participated in and initiated a number of significant debates in the JCCV, including the Wik legislation introduced by the Howard government to curtail native title rights, the application by a gay & lesbian support group to affiliate with the JCCV, anti-terror legislation and others.

    Issues relating to Israel and the Middle East have proved to be the areas of most tension between the AJDS and the JCCV. The JCCV has never quite embraced the notion that in order to legitimately claim to be the community roof body means it needs to accept the diversity of views that really do exist in the community.

    While it is almost certainly true that all affiliates of the JCCV fundamentally support the existence of Israel (the AJDS included), the JCCV is not the Zionist Council – it is a broader based roof body that includes organisations whose central focus is locally based, as well as Zionist and non-Zionist groups. The Zionist groups may indeed disagree passionately with the latest AJDS campaign – and have every right to argue against it – but the JCCV should remain above the fray, as it has on the quite fundamental differences between Orthodox and Progressive Judaism – both of whom are represented in the JCCV.

    On the specific issue of the AJDS campaign, both the Zionist Council and JCCV are aware that there are many people in the Jewish community who think that the Israeli settlements on the West Bank are detrimental to the future of Israel. For consumers of Israeli products to be able to make a choice about the particular Israeli products they choose to buy, both supports Israel by aiding its economy as well as avoiding support for aspects of Israeli policy about which there is disagreement. It’s a campaign about which there can be legitimate opposition, but it is hardly “repugnant” in any objective sense.

  • Mandi Katz says:

    Galus eds – are you able to clarify where this statement was made? It doesn’t make sense that the JCCV would initiate this.

    Eds: Hi Mandi. AJDS emailed us their press release on Tuesday, and the JCCV emailed us their statement on Thursday.

  • Shirlee. says:

    Hallelujah!!

    Yes they did it. It makes perfect sense, Enough of the loony Left thank you.

    I have just 10 minutes ago received and email telling me that the ECAJ released a statement at 5 pm, along similar but firmer lines. That should be a hoot given the pathetic ones they have released over the last couple of months

    I have been having huge discussions on this very issue for the last week. The AJDS are a vile racist antisemitic group of individuals

    Having this group as an affiliate of the JCCV is not much better than having ‘Australians for Palestine’ as part of it,there is little or no difference between the two groups.

    In the past few months we had the Green Sunday fiasco, one with Bob Carr and now this. Enough, we don’t need the “Enemy within”

    Jake I believe they were admitted by pressure nothing else. This would never have happened in Sydney. There appears to be a problem in Melbourne.

  • David Marlow says:

    From the AJDS boycott website:

    At this time of Pesach—the festival of freedom—we remember that we were slaves in Egypt.
    What does it mean to remember this?
    It means that we remember what it means to be imprisoned, to not be able to determine our fate.
    It means that we remember what it means to be an oppressed and dominated people.
    It means that remember that as we were slaves in Egypt, so too others are enslaved and oppressed in many countries around the world, and that we must fight alongside them for their freedom.
    We remember that escape was possible, that slavery came to an end.
    On this Pesach we ask you to join a long history of Jews who have fought for freedom, for both Jews and for others. To stand alongside others, Jews and non-Jews, who have made ethical choices about how to live their lives in order to make themselves better people, and to make the world a better place.

  • Surely it is reasonable for a roof body like the JCCV to draw a line that limits member orgs. Things like this test the line, and it’s equally reasonable to ask the JCCV to articulate what that line is, for its members to agree on the line, and potentially for a member org to be ejected for crossing the line.

    So what *is* the line? Jewish orgs that call for the replacement of Israel with a binational state? that support BDS campaigns against Israel? that support Iran’s calls for the destruction of Israel?

  • Otto Waldmann says:

    1. Mandi Katz, it does not surprise me to realise that you DO NOT realise that, in fact, as in writing right here, you DO support the AJDS campaign !!!
    Do not stop, keep us entertained.

    2. Harold Zwier, if the abhorent ideology of AJDS weren’t good enough reason for the consideration of its exclusion from the JCCV – not a minute too soon -, the incongruities you regaled us with in your posting here should have been a perfectly legitimate reason to have you evicted from a respectable Jewish organisation – actually an organisation that is about to REgain its respectability, JCCV.
    Your statememt that JCCV is NOT THE Zionist Council, as if JCCV would NOT be an “exclusive” Zionist organisation, demonstrates not only hat you have no idea what JCCV should function as, but that you would use such a rationale to secure the logic of your own “legitimate” place within JCCV. It simply betrays the well known FACT that AJDS is NOT a Zionist organisation and, by your own rationale, should be accepted, as such, within the JCCV you are conceiving in such a pathetically false way. I know I traced a long line in lieu of saying simply : YOU DO NOT BELONG IN JCCV !!!
    And, to complete the rationale, yes, NOT all Jews deserve to be in it !!!!

  • Mandi Katz says:

    First off, my views here are entirely personal and don’t represent any organisation I’m involved in.

    David – I agree there is a line, and of course, it is reasonable for the JCCV to draw the line in accordance with its constituency.

    I happen to think this is the wrong line – settlements are certainly not the only or even the primary obstacle to the realisation of a Palestinian state, but they are a real obstacle.

    Many Israelis, like many very strong supporters of and advocates for Israel in the Diaspora, see the settlement enterprise as disastrous for Israel’s future. Even if you take the Daniel Gordis view (and I’m being broad here, so apologies for the lack of finesse)that the occupation can’t be ended any time soon and has to be ‘managed’ it’s pretty much indisputable that many aspects of settlements exacerbate the worst aspects of the occupation. I imagine that there are members of the JCCV exec who hold that view.

    Why then draw the line at a political campaign which backs that position, to say that people who campaign on that basis, are so beyond the pale that they are not entitled to be considered as part of the Jewish community? (And again I think it’s a very misguided campaign not least because it feeds the view that settlements are the key obstacle to peace)

  • Shirlee. says:

    My point is – How on earth were they accepted as an affiliate of the JCCV to begin with?

    This being the case whey then did the ECAJ continue having the JCCV as an affiliate of theirs?

    I see issues here all around.

    The JCCV is a State body and as such, should not have admitted the AJDS to its body, the JDS is a national group, not a State one.

  • Mandi – once we agree that there should be a line, then it’s up to the JCCV itself to decide on the line and enforce it.

    That “settlements are an obstacle to peace” is debatable. There are many obstacles to peace. Some are in Israel’s control, and most are not. Some are greater obstacles and some are lesser obstacles. Groups like AJDS seem to maintain the view that we have an obligation to remove *all* “obstacles to peace” in our control and once that happens, either we will see reciprocity from our enemies or peace will magically emerge. Time and again that has been proven to be wrong in practice, and yet people have not adjusted their views. Rather, they have suggested that we still have not removed enough “obstacles to peace”.

    I think the issue here is that the AJDS’s campaign bears too much of a resemblance to the BDS campaigns, which are *definitely* over the line.

  • Joe in Australia says:

    The AJDS should have been tossed out a long time ago. They can come back when they drop their obsessive need to suck up to anti-Semites.

    True story: I was walking with my friend through a forest and he said “I can hear owls up ahead!” We stopped and listened for a while and I could make out “oo-oo! oo-oo! oo-oo!”

    We moved forward quietly, expecting to see these magnificent birds in their own habitat. Imagine our disappointment when it turned out to be a meeting of the AJDS, with Larry Stillman hopping up and down every few seconds to say “As a Jew! As a Jew! As a Jew!”

    (not actually a true story)

  • Michael Burd says:

    Mandi,
    Considering AJDS spokesperson / Editor main claim to fame is ”he has been campaigning for Palestinian Human Rights for 35 years ”

    DISCUSSION: Truth strengthens the case for Palestine | Green Left …
    http://www.greenleft.org.au/node/29648Jun 11, 2003 – COMMENT BY SOL SALBE. Green Left Weekly is partisan on the issue of Palestine and Israel. ..

    [Israeli-born Sol Salbe has been campaigning for Palestinian human rights for 35 years.

    and considering AJDS have links with Palestinian Advocacy Network AJDS would probably be accepted by the JCCV equivalent ICV Islamic Council Victoria as one of their affiliates , where they can continue their anti- Israel activism, so whats the problem ?

    Michael Burd

    BTW Mandi I guess you would also expect JCCV to accept Antony Loewensteins dissident Jewish group IAJV to be accepted as affiliates if they asked?

  • Shirlee. says:

    Love it Joe!!

    Yes I think I guessed it wasn’t true

  • Sabra says:

    It always amazes me how disparate Jews’ views can be. 65 years ago I wonder whether there would’ve been such disparity in fighting the common enemy… yet now, when we are stronger than ever, we risk being torn apart from within due to the stupidity of some elements of the community.

    United we stand, divided we fall.

    If only AJDS would remember that… there is enough hostility against Israel from without the community .. imagine how our detractors must be laughing all the way to the ‘green line’ at the shenanigans our own community is going thru. When will we ever learn?

  • Alan Freedman says:

    By stating that it “fundamentally supports the existence of Israel” the The AJDS deliberately fudges the lines on this issue.

    I am yet to see or hear the AJDS declaring that they accept the State of Israel as the nation-state of the Jewish people, or that they support the preservation of the Jewish character of Israel.

    My understanding is that supporters of the AJDS believe in the fairyland notion that Israel should be the peaceful home to whoever wants to live there, regardless of their faith or political view, ie essentially a bi-national state for all Jews and Palestinians.

    The AJDS has more in common with the Palestinian cause than that of Israel – it is truly the enemy within, and does not warrant the formal recognition that JCCV membership affords it.

  • geoffff says:

    It is time to have it out with the local rump of the Peter Beinart so called “progressive” or “open” Zionists. They are just so wrong on so many levels it is impossible to believe they are in good faith.

    The AJDS now has a campaign website in which they have put up “10 reasons” why they are into BDS-lite. It really is quite extraordinary stuff. They start with the offensively ignorant “the settlements are illegal under international law” and then deteoriate rapidly. “Settlers” stealing land and water and beating up the Arabs. “Settlers” kicking over olive trees. Poor “Palestinians” who have to pass through checkpoints to get to their pastures where they have to wait so long they have babies. “Jewish only” roads. Pure antizionist propaganda. It’s all there. Pure racism.

    Interesting thing, they don’t mention Jerusalem. Only the “Green Line”. Is “East” Jerusalem part of the “West Bank” and therefore Jews living or born there must be boycotted as well? They don’t say. There’s a reason for that. They are agnostic about it. They don’t want to say “yes” and therefore prove how marginal and repugnant they are among Jews and they don’t want to say “no” and offend their mates at Electronic Intifada which incidentally they link along with Mondelweiss, among the most extremist of the antisemitic sites outside of the white supremacist blogs.

    Pleasing their mates on the far left is what this is all about.

    The AJDS antisemitic-lite campaign deserves it’s own post and shortly will get one at my blog. Of course it is tragic that there has been no two state solution, or any solution, but to blame Israel or the “settlements” for that, despite all the evidence, and to do so by adopting the common antisemitic tropes of Israel’s (and the “Palestinian” people’s) enemies, is quite frankly contemptible and cowardly.

    http://geofffff.blogspot.com.au/2013/03/shirlee-versus-ajds.html

  • Reality Check says:

    In Israel all points of view are represented in the Knesset, including from the far right and left. Here in Australia, feeling guilty for not living in Israel, we see as anti-Israel any views that may differ. Israel is democratic, but the JCCV certainly ain’t.

  • Mandi Katz says:

    Thanks eds.

    I’d be really interested to hear from someone from the AJDS whether they discussed the campaign with anyone from the JCCV before launching it, whether they tried to explain the rationale of the campaign and whether they were open to hearing what the JCCV’s response would

  • Shirlee. says:

    The Knesset is not in the Diaspora. It’s our duty to support Israel not to try to bring her down, which is what groups like the AJDS and others are about. If you have a problem with Israel go live there and then you have a right to criticise.

    There are enough people in the world at the moment doing all they can to delegitimise Her without the enemy within doing their bit as I see it.

  • Shirlee. says:

    Mandi

    If they did that I think it would have signed their death warrant

    In early March there was an incident at the monthly meeting, with the JCCV accusing the AJDS of being antisemitic.
    Then we had the issue with Green Sunday, which they claim wasn’t an initiative of the AJDS. It raises questions though given that Larry Stillman was one of those activists and the topic was posted on their FB page.
    Then there was the issue with Bob Carr and now the icing on the cake is this BDS action.

  • andrew wirth says:

    A refinement of David’s “there is a line, we just need to define it” argument is the consideration of the proportion of the Jewish community represented by any point of view. If a view is considered by JCCV to be marginal (or over the line) ideologically, but is held by a “sizeable” proportion of the community, then one could argue that the JCCV, as an umbrella organisation, should be obliged to reevaluate its lines. On that basis, it would not be unreasonable for the JCCV to seek information about the AJDS’ depth of support in the Victorian Jewish community. If a group’s views are both marginal and representative of only a “handful” of community members, the JCCV would have reasonable grounds for questioning its claim for membership.

  • Michael Burd says:

    Mandi can you tell me if the ICV which represents the main stream Muslim community the equivalent of the JCCV have fringe organizations affiliated with their mainstream community that are Anti- Palestinian , anti- Muslim community , critics of the Muslim community leadership /representatives and Pro- Zionist activists. If not Why Not>

    *Only please don’t give me the standard Jewish leftist patronizing mantra that we [the Jews] are better than them.

    Michael Burd

  • andrew wirth says:

    The “mantra” that “we” are better than “them” sounds more rightist than leftist

  • Reallity Check says:

    OK Michael Burd, we Jews are lesser than them. That’s why we hate ourselves. Simple Ay!

  • Michael Burd says:

    Hey Reality ,Never heard the term ‘ Self hating Muslim” have you ?

  • Sam Salcman says:

    The debate over the future of AJDS membership with JCCV is well overdue.

    By joining the ranks of the BDS movement AJDS is advertantly joining the ranks not of those who advocate the common goal of a 2 state solution with Israel and Palestine existing side by side within recognized and agreed boundaries which the majority of the Israeli population subscribe to but of those who advocate a single state.

    That is the purpose of the BDS movement-to eliminate Israel.The founder of the BDS movement Omar Barghouti stated in “Electronic Intifada” in 2004 that the true aim of BDS in his words is “euthanasia” for Israel. The objective of BDS, he said, is one state to which all Palestinian refugees and their descendants will “return”.

    Thus AJDS supporters are either deluded about the meaning of their present actions in support of BDS or perhaps they really share Barghouti’s views.

  • Sam Salcman says:

    The debate over the future of AJDS membership with JCCV is well overdue.

    By joining the ranks of the BDS movement AJDS is advertantly joining the ranks not of those who advocate the common goal of a 2 state solution with Israel and Palestine existing side by side within recognized and agreed boundaries which the majority of the Israeli population subscribe to but of those who advocate a single state.

    That is the purpose of the BDS movement to eliminate Israel . The founder of the BDS movement Omar Barghouti stated in “Electronic Intifada” in 2004 that the true aim of BDS in his words is “euthanasia” for Israel. The objective of BDS, he said, is one state to which all Palestinian refugees and their descendants will “return”.

    Thus AJDS supporters are either deluded about the meaning of their present actions in support of BDS or perhaps they really share Barghouti’s views.

  • geoffff says:

    BDS-lite campaigners are on the fringe in Israel too but at least they are Israelis. There is something deeply disturbing about someone without a personal stake in the country and who does not carry any of the burden or bear any of the risk of living there as citizens should not only assume a morally superior air from this position of deep ignorance but take it upon themselves to boycott the people they decide have no right to be where they are because they are Jews.

    If you act like the world’s doormat you will treated that way. That a personal choice I guess, perhaps some people like being doormats but the very least they can do is not do it on behalf of the remaining Jews of the Middle East.

    AJDS are entitled to answer the same question that begs of all BDS campaigners, lite, heavy or raving fanatical. How is it that you are able to overlook perhaps hundreds of situations where groups are subject to real and serious oppression and occupation and violent denial of self determination, from Tibet and Asia, South America through Africa to Iran, Syria and the rest of the Middle East, just to pounce on Israel and its human rights “transgressions” which even by their allegations are mild by comparison?

    What quirk of the mind allows them to do that?

  • Otto Waldmann says:

    Just wait minute fellas !!!!

    Nina Bassat has ONLY posed the QUESTION of AJDS’ suitability on the JCCV !!! She did not come out firing big statements as seen at some of the present posters – incl. yrs truly -.
    What if the JCCV plenum votes for the AJDS to remain in the JCCV !!!

    I, for one, am not at all impressed with the JCCV. They created the problem in the 1st place by accepting the unacceptable AJDS and it has taken JCCV YEARS of observing, just like any of the pissd off posters here, that AJDS were and ARE totally inconsistent with the function of JCCV. In the meantime AJDS has caused serious tzures and allowed acquired legitimacy to blokes like Zwier, Stillman and a few more unbearable characters to claim communal representation by virtue of beng INSIDE the “umbrella”.
    We are still at the stage of hoping that the plenum of JCCV will carry out the right vote.
    Tell you what, seeing the Pesach message of the JCCV CEO I don’t feel that good abt it.

  • reuvain says:

    Strange world, an Arab can buy a house in Tel Aviv and a Jew can’t buy in parts of Jerusalem according to these so called progressives. Imagine for a moment if some would suggest that Arabs not live in Tel Aviv they would at the forefront screaming discrimination.

    If they want to boycott Jewish communities in the West Bank then why shouldn’t the Jewish community boycott them.

  • Michael Burd says:

    Sam,
    Larry Stillman executive member of the AJDS reckons Israel as a home for the Jews is past its useby date this includes right of return.
    So you are not wrong about Stillman and his comrades at AJDS sharing
    Barghouti’s views.

    Of course Stillman , Mandi , and all the other fellow travelers would not have a problem with the Palestinian leaderships call for a
    ‘Islamic State of Palestine’ [ see the Hamas charter] which would join the other 57 Islamic countries , Of course they would not have a problem with those 57 either . { I have yet to read any mention or objection from these lefty Jews about that ] It appears the problem with the Jewish left and anti- Zionist Jews is the existence of one little tiny Jewish state …Go Figure

    Michael Burd

  • Reallity Check says:

    I am sure there are self hating Muslims, but they either leave Islam or get knocked off, but michael Burd reckons anyone who doesn’t share his right wing opinions is a self hating Jew. But what happened to free speech, because what JCCV is trying to do is shut the AJDS up. I bet people like Mr Burd were all against the governments media regulation bill because they claimed it was an attack on free speech but here they have no problem with trying to keep anyone with a different view to theirs quiet. Pure hypocracy.

  • Shirlee. says:

    I doubt there are self hating Muslims. I have three ex-Muslim friends who don’t wear their leaving Islam on their sleeves like a badge of honour, as the enemy within do.

    Having encountered many of these so-called Jews at BDS rallies, it’s their big moment proudly proclaiming “well I am a Jew and I …”

    I doubt Michael Burd “reckons anyone who doesn’t share his right wing opinions is a self hating Jew” That’s your take on it. There’s left and there is LEFT and there is a huge difference.

    Good, I hope the JCCV shuts the AJDS up and a good 95% of the Community would agree from the feed back I am getting on this. Certainly in Sydney they would.

    We have enough enemies, without people like that of our own in our midst. I am sick to the pit of my stomach to think what Israel and Jews have endured down through the centuries for these ‘people’ to pull her down. They have no right. If they have issues with Israel then go live there, then they have a right to right what they see as wrong

    The media bill proposed was against free speech no way about it. As far as ‘freedom of speech’ goes we don’t have that in the country, only implied ‘freedom of speech’ and no Bill of Rights.

  • Doodie Ringelblum says:

    I find the prospect of the JCCV disaffiliating the AJDS quite astounding.

    It’s own policy document states that the JCCV:

    3.7.2 RECOGNISES that irrespective of the common traits that bind us as a community, Victorian Jewry is also diverse and pluralistic and that this is reflected in different, often strongly held views, on a range of issues affecting the Jewish and larger communities.

    3.7.3 CALLS FOR respect for any such differences, while affirming that disagreement is only permissible in ways that do not vilify other persons or their views.

    Hard for me to understand how expelling an organisation represents respect for differences.

    Shirley and Geoffff – you don’t think that members of the AJDS should express an opinion on Israeli government policies without living there. Do you feel that rule should apply to members of the State Zionist Council? Or are there only certain views which may be expressed in Australia and others only in Israel?

    Michael Burd – I am curious if you would accept Meretz holding a place at the JCCV. Obviously you think being “Left” is stupid, but do you think it should disqualify you from having a voice?

    Reuvain – it is indeed a strange world. An Arab may legally buy a house in Tel-Aviv, but not live in the West Bank settlements. I take it you think that’s ok?

    The Zionist Federation tried to prevent the Bund from joining the JCCV (Board of Deputies) in the 50s, vilified Norman Rothfield throughout the 70s and lobbied to reject the AJDS in the 80s. It’s to the credit of the JCCV as a whole that the need for inclusivity and diversity was recognised. (The rejection of Aleph is another discussion). It would be an enormously regressive step for that approach to be reversed.

  • Joe in Australia says:

    Doodie, surely you recognise that even an inclusive organisation must have some boundaries. In the case of the JCCV, those boundaries exclude purportedly Jewish groups that attack fundamental elements of Jewish identification. A Christian missionary group would rightly be excluded, for instance, no matter how much it stressed that it was made up of “completed Jews”.

    By supporting BDS the AJDS is lending its aid to a campaign that is racist and anti-Semitic both in its conception and its implementation. It is reminiscent of the European anti-Jewish boycotts of the 1920s and ’30s and the Arab anti-Jewish boycott of the same period. Israel is still subject to that boycott, and I think you would be hard-pressed to find BDS supporters who will tell you that although the boycott of the settlements is correct, the general boycott of Israel is wrong. The focus on the settlements is merely tactical.

    If the AJDS actually cared about the Palestinians it has a plethora of options that do not involve attacking Jews and the Jewish State. Alas, the AJDS has once again shown that it will fall into bed with any Jew-hater that will give them a forum.

  • Doodie Ringelblum says:

    Joe – Certainly I would agree that the JCCV can (should) exclude groups that are avowedly opposed to the welfare of the Jewish people.

    I do take issue with you labelling the AJDS as “purportedly” Jewish and I don’t think that being either pro or anti-settlements is a fundamental element of Jewish identification.

    There are enough Jews within Israel who support a settlement boycott that I am comfortable disagreeing with your characterising it as anti-semitic. And certainly within the broader Jewish world there are plenty of people who support or feel conflicted about a settlement boycott but wouldn’t dream of an Israel boycott.

    I don’t think the issue is whether the AJDS cares about Palestinians. The issue is do they care about Jews. I think they do. Their conclusions about how to do that might be radically different from yours. But that doesn’t make them unworthy of being part of the organised community.

    Shirlee has compared them to “Jews for Palestine”. I strongly disagree. I met Peter Slezak at LimudOz last year and entered into a lengthy correspondence with him to try and understand the basis of him presenting his views “as a Jew”. Eventually I dismissed him when he stated that though he was arguing for Palestinian rights “as a Jew”, he didn’t care if the Jews survived as a group or not.

    For all the criticism heaped on the AJDS can anyone show any evidence of them as individuals or as a group not caring about the future of the Jewish people? (Not “misguided” or “wrong” or “playing into the hands of the enemy” – but not caring.) I think that is the criterion the JCCV should use for exclusion.

  • Doodie Ringelblum says:

    Michael – which Australian Jewish groups would you regard as right wing?

  • Shirlee. says:

    “Michael – which Australian Jewish groups would you regard as right wing?”

    OK, so Im not Michael !!

    The answer is none

  • geoffff says:

    AJDS For The High Jump.

    Why those who have found a reason to boycott Israel, alone of all countries in the world, in the wash of a global antisemitic and antizionist tsunami, are repugnant and intolerable within the formal structure of the Jewish community.

    http://geofffff.blogspot.com.au/2013/03/ajds-for-high-jump.html

  • Michael Burd says:

    Doodie
    I don’t know of any Australian Jewish groups that are particularly right wing because most of the the groups that I mentioned have a mixture of executives and board members that have various views None of the mentioned groups for instance would have the view of not wanting a negotiated two state settlement
    All if them would support which ever pm and government in Israel that was democraticly elected
    Doodie even AiJaC which I know some consider right wing has a self confessed left wing on their Editirial board of the Austtalia Israel Review magazine aand all of the Jewish groups mentioned condemned the very pro zionist Dutch mp Geert Wilders because he is a critic of Islam I would hardly call that right wing .
    I would consider some Jewish groups left wing ADC comes to mind of course NIf and J street are on the extreme left .
    It is strange that when ever some defends israel,s human rights they immediately called right wing
    hope that clears things up .

  • Alan Freedman says:

    Doodie

    Using the terminology “Does the AJDS care about Jews?” is too broad and misses the point.

    No doubt they would say they DO care about Jews which is why they hold the views they do. I would agree that they do care about Jews – but only as individuals; their world view is that all Jews should be living in blissful harmony with whoever else wants to live alongside them.

    However, they don’t care about Jews when it comes to the State of Israel; their view of the Arab-Israeli conflict totally ignores reality and is reduced to the point where Israel should effectively surrender its Jewish character in order to accommodate all the Arabs. All in the name of peace, of course.

    The JCCV is the umbrella organisation that represents the Jewish community. If “most of the Jewish community” is offended by the inclusion of an organisation (albeit a Jewish one) that is openly hostile to Israel, then that community has a right to consider whether this hostile organisation has a legitimate place within its ranks.

    This discussion must take place in the context of our democratic values and freedom of speech, but ultimately, the “community” must decide at what point a dissenting view crosses the line.

    My view is that the AJDS crossed it years ago.

  • Reality Check says:

    Michael Burd thinks by being “mainstream’ excludes any political leanings; such as, all the organizations he lists above aren’t right wing, they are mainstream. I hate to inform him that one doesn’t exclude the other. Right- wing leanings in Germany in the 1930s were, dare I say, very much mainstream.
    But I want to know what Mr Burd thinks of Senator Conroy’s media regulation bills? Did Mr Burd go along with the hype by the Daily Telegraph and compared Conray to Stalin? Or does he disagree with Malcolm Turnbull, that regulating media ownership, so that it’s not controlled by one person, is an attack on democracy, liberty and free speech?
    Because if he goes for the former, then he must also agree with keeping AJDS in JCCV, even though he disagrees with what they say, as preserving free speech. If the later, then Mr Burd is a hypocrate.

  • Gil Solomon says:

    It is bad enough that Diaspora Jewry organisations are currently dominated by a left wing, typically anti-Israeli mindset, but when we have in our midst organisations like AJDS who we indulge with some sense of legitimacy, we certainly have taken leave of our senses.

    This organisation might just as well openly advertise that they are an advocacy arm of Hamas as their campaign, were it to be successful, would assist in causing economic disruption for Israel, nothing more nothing less.

    For the JCCV to have ever allowed them to become an affiliate is a disgrace and the comment that they made recently calling the AJDS campaign “repugnant” would be the understatement of the year. It’s time the JCCV threw these people out and publicly declared that they are a left wing fringe element that in no way represents the majority view.

    Some time back Arabs wanted a settlement freeze. Not just a freeze on expansion of settlement boundaries but building within a settlement, like an additional room in a house to accommodate the birth of a new child. Netanyahu obliged them for one year and still Abbas & Co. did not return to the negotiating table. Yet groups like AJDS think their “Don’t Buy” campaign is part of the solution!

    Arabs will continue putting up proposals they know Israel cannot adopt unless it wants to commit suicide. This way they keep this issue, this festering boil, in a permanent state of crisis while clueless Diaspora Jews can’t or refuse to see this and groups like AJDS run around making proposals that would put Israel in jeopardy.

    When is Diaspory Jewry ever going to wake up out of its coma? The Arab world never wants this issue to be resolved otherwise it might then draw the world media’s attention to the plight of citizens in their own countries. They obviously want the lot. Their intention is to bleed Israel to death, concession after concession and groups like AJDS are aiding and abetting this.

    Jewish groups should ask themselves why is it that Abbas still condones the teaching of Arab children that Jews are the offspring of pigs and apes and yet they still regard this man as a person who is capable of conducting negotiations in good faith.

  • Otto Waldmann says:

    Just in case the supporters of AJDS reckon they have a case, here is how stuff like organisations works.

    People of similar ideas/purposes get together and form organisations, some are called – for the sake of this argument – JCCV.
    If certain members of the said organisation are deemed unsuitable for membership they are NOT a part of it.
    JCCV’s leadership have concluded – and explained why and how – that AJDS are no longer compatible with being members of the JCCV. The plenum of the JCCV shall take a vote on the issue. If AJDS shall be eliminated from the JCCV there are no avenues for appeal and AJDS shall have to function outside the JCCV. Comnsidering that AJDS have ALWAYS been OUTSIDE the philosophical spectrum of ALL other orgs. within the JCCV, what the hell is the problems with AJDS in continuing their agenda as always, OUTSIDE the ideological umbrella prevailing within the JCCV. All these are redundant tantrums by a mob excelling in this vacuous noise about one kind of persecution or another. Honestly, sometimes I feel that these AJDS guys sound almost Jewish. Kvetching and kvetching……….
    Just remember what a certain Mr. Marx said about not being accepted by a club. Considering the ideological affinities of most AJDS members,following Marx should not be a problem……….

  • Reallity Check says:

    Oops, If Mr Burd disagrees with Malcolm Turnbull then he’s right and any bias in the media, or roof bodies like the JCCV, either from the left or the right, should be opposed. Sorry, I got it wrong. But I still make the point that you can’t have it both ways.

  • letters in the age says:

    Disunity is death…….

    New blood at all levels.

    Cheers

  • Jonny Schauder says:

    Wow… Surely as a nation we all seek debate and diversity?

    I would have thought especially during pesach that we understand the slippery slope of exclusion.

    Terrible. Protect free speech! Celebrate debate!

  • Shirlee. says:

    Sorry Jonny, there is Free Speech and then there is “FREE SPEECH”

    When it comes to Free speech and that Free Speech is about demonising Israel at every opportunity, then sorry, but no Free speech in my book.

    The AJDS has a track record which must make Australians for Palestine very envious.

    In December they wrote to Bob Carr agreeing with the Australian Government’s decision to abstain at the UN General Assembly vote to upgrade the Palestinian status to a non-member observer state and more

    Fine, no issue there. That’s their right

    However there is an issue with this comment at the bottom of their letter which they feel gives them legitimacy, but is dishonest

    “By way of reference, our organisation is an affiliate of the Jewish Community Council of Victoria.”

    To me is akin to those leftist Jews I encounter at BDS ‘performances’, who make a big deal of saying “Well I am a Jew and I support the BDS” which they wear like a badge of honour.

    Then we had the dreadful performance on Green Sunday because the AJN would not publish the letter they submitted.
    That must have been some letter!!

    Now this BDS action.

    That’s why I say there is Freedom of Speech and there is FREEDOM OF SPEECH

  • geoffff says:

    This is not about free speech. The AJDS is free to say what it likes. Like Israel this is a free society unlike the society that some at least in the AJDS and their global allies are trying to fit up Israel.

    Because this is a free society the JCCV is also free to disaffiliate a group that wages campaigns that the bulk of its members find repugnant. That is what happens in a liberal democracy. This is more than just a disagreement on politics. This is something dangerous at a dangerous time and the concern about what exactly the AJDS is on about when it comes to Israel reaches way beyond the Victorian Jewish community and indeed Australia.

    It is time these people were confronted not just here but everywhere. They should be required to say exactly what they expect of Israel and the Jews. But that should be from the outside. Right now I think we’ve heard enough.

    http://geofffff.blogspot.com.au/2013/03/ajds-for-high-jump.html

  • Reallity Check says:

    ge off, This is about free speech. The JCCV is supposed to be a representative Jewish body for the Victorian Jewish community, which should represent all Jews, including those who see things differently to you, so if you have an organisation like AJDS who ain’t mainstream, they should still be represented, and that’s what free speech is all about. If the JCCV chooses to represent views in line with the main machers, then change to name of the roof body to something else, but don’t pretend to be representative of the whole Jewish Community.

  • Shirlee. says:

    I question why the AJDS was ever admitted as a member of the JCCV to start, aside from its ideologies.

    The JCCV is a State body and as such should only accept State organisations as affiliates.

    The AJDS by its very name is a National Organisation

  • JayinPhiladelphia says:

    A view from the US, if I may.

    A healthy debate about where the line should be drawn is always welcome. But boycotting Jews (let alone in the extremely offensive way AJDS has framed it), no matter where we may live, work, or set up a business, should always be way far out of bounds and well over it.

    I see nothing controversial about that.

  • geoffff says:

    That’s not what I would call free speech Reality Check. Nor is it the role of a community roof body to assimilate and affiliate publicly expressed views and campaigns that the bulk of its membership find repugnant. Rather its role is to project the views of its membership. That’s not free speech. That insanity. That why the enemies of Israel and the West laugh at us.

    I say again this is not a question of free speech. AJDS is perfectly capable of speaking for itself and no doubt will continue to. Indeed they will be invited to. In fact challenged. It’s time they put up or shut up about what they want.

    If what they are saying is they want some kind of Barghouti style “bi-national democracy” then people need to know that. If they are seriously pushing the Arab Muslim “right of return” that leaves no place to go except war then people need to know that to.

    This is not a game.

    Those in their circle might then have pause to think this through. Then they might wish have they had opted for “shut up”.

    That’s how free speech works in a liberal democracy. It’s not about cruelling what someone else has to say. It is however about seeing who else is on the platform.

    http://geofffff.blogspot.com.au/2013/03/ajds-for-high-jump.html

  • Michael Burd says:

    Why does AJDS want to be affiliated with the JCCV which is supposed to represent the main stream Jewish community, when clearly AJDS members are far from mainstream Jews they are in the context of the Jewish community fringe extremists , socialists , communists , supporters Islamo -facsists if you like .
    The answer is quite obvious the only way the AJDS members can get their extremist views across the mainstream media i.e the ABC, SBS, Fairfax , Universities all outlets for the Palestinian Lobby is to promote the fact that they are legitimate by being affiliated with the JCCV rather than the extremist fringe group that they really are. A bit Like Loewenstein he is only popular with the ABC , SBS and Fairfax because he uses his Jewish Birth as a tool to attack his fellows Jews, of course ABC, SBS , Fairfax etc can’t be accused of antisemitism after they allow Loewenstein full reign to vilify Israeli Jews, Zionists and the Jewish community.
    The biggest fools are the President and Board of JCCV who have been harassed for years to get rid of these 5 th Columm Jewish activists but they have stuck their stupid heads in the sand all this time and only now are realizing hey maybe they have been negligent in their duties .
    [Free speech huh, reality, we all know what happens to free speech when someone criticizes the religion of peace people don’t we.]

  • Otto Waldmann says:

    Reality

    tell you what, since you love so much the topic of free speech – which has been repeatedly excluded as relevant – , according to your habbtiual penchant for the annoying tail stirring interventions, why not engage in the following, just as stridently currently pertinent issues:

    – pet food freedom of choice
    – big and bigger size dresses available at K-mart
    – legalised jay-walking
    – AJDS holding meetings at Jenolan Caves ( and remaining there !!
    – reality check

    I am not going to ask you: why on earth do you have to disturb the rational tone of our debate with motherless motherhood issues !! simply because , by now, I know what’s wrong (!!!) with you.

  • Gil Solomon says:

    Since my earlier post this morning, I am saddened by those subsequent replies expounding the virtues of diversity etc. etc.
    This is all irrelevant. Diaspora dialogue on all this only poisons the atmosphere against Israel and adds to the relentless propaganda against it.

    I care only about the survival of Israel, a country facing existential threats day in day out, a country facing an implacable enemy that has violated every agreement they ever signed.
    And in the face of this, many people are still preoccupied with talking about free speech, exclusion or diversity or whatever!

    On the eve of Obama’s recent arrival in Israel, Benjamin Netanyahu reiterated for the umpteenth time “With a Palestinian partner who is willing to conduct negotiations in good faith, Israel will be prepared for a historic compromise that will end the conflict with the Palestinians forever”. Unfortunately, those words by Netanyahu meant absolutely nothing to the other side.

    The facts are that to the so called “Palestinians”:
    The Camp David Accords meant nothing to them.
    The Oslo Accords meant nothing to them.
    The letter from George Bush dated 2004 meant nothing to them.
    The Annapolis proposals of 2007 meant nothing to them.
    Olmert offered them everything at Annapolis and still they didn’t accept.

    So what can we in the Diaspora do to assist Israel?
    It is time many of us on the right of centre attend meetings and make an attempt to join the boards of mainstream organisations to change the leftist structure of those boards and the policy direction. As far as groups like AJDS are concerned, their days as an affiliate of any mainstream organisation should come to an end.

    For those individuals and groups who have bought the Palestinian narrative and are forever supporting Arab viewpoints, below are some facts for you to ponder:

    In biblical times all of what is now Israel and the West Bank (Judea and Samaria) was Jewish. When the Romans conquered the territory they named the entire area “Philistina” in order to rub salt into the wounds of the defeated Jews by calling the place in honour of their ancient and mortal enemies the Philistines. By doing so, the Romans acknowledged that the owners of the territory were Jews. Down the centuries the name Philistina was anglicised to Palestine.

    At the beginning of the 20th Century if one were referred to as a Palestinian, it was automatically implied that he or she was Jewish.

    Decades later, Arabs cleverly commandeered the term “Palestinian”. The facts are that Palestine was a land mass administered finally by the British until the 1947 Partition Plan when only a small portion was allocated back to its centuries old rightful owners, the Jewish people.

    The so called “Palestinians” of today should get down on their hands and knees and thank Allah that the Gaza Strip is not next door to Russia or any other country for that matter but that they have a Jewish country as their neighbour.
    A Jewish country which up to now has gone out of its way to exercise the utmost restraint in spite of endless deadly provocation.

  • Otto Waldmann says:

    Gil

    most commendable and , indeed us, the Diaspora do have an important function.

    re the real-politik, there is a certain theory ventured by a certain bloke who happens NOT to be my favourite flavour, but who I am going to quote, just for the benefit of our topic, called the “anti historicity” approach. It means that, when dealing with practical immediate issues, certain – he says all – matters partaining to historical details, to some extent the ontology of the case, are immaterial, irrelevant, they do not need to appear on any of the debated facts/documents. Political discourse for mass consumption would need, by certain design, to refer to “background”, yet, the concrete political arrangements/negotiations address strictly tangibles of current relevance. The Palestinian contingent makes public demands which are not all necessarily present at the coal face stage of decision making. I know that we are NOT here to decide on the fate of any side, but to expand with the persistance one sees pubicly on the ontological merits of one camp or another is, at least, frustrating for its usefulness is utterly dismissed.
    Israel shall succeed on the back of concrete pressures and inducements provided by its arsenal of current and foreseable implements of strength and , just as important, to the calculable acceptable effects of the demands she makes. Exactly the same goes for the other side. Fortunately, the Palestinian stance has NOT garnered anywhere anything comparable to Israel’s dealing hand.
    This reality explains the rabid and vicious intensification of the pro Palestinian propaganda activities throughout. This includes everything that we witness in relation to attacks on all matters Israeli AND universallly Jewish. To this extent, what AJDS are doing is precisely providing a SIXTH column to the Palestinian offensives. They are the typical useful idiots and, what makes it even more acutely deranged, they don’t even know it, hence AJDS’ insistance that they are both correct and even Zionist.
    Israel shall continue to build its case and that foundation which also means Jewish living spaces wherever they find it strategically necessary. This forms the kind of moral AND practical support those brave settlers KNOW they are being provided by Israel and also by we, the valuable Galuth.

  • David Schulberg says:

    Perhaps with all the angst being expressed about whether the JCCV should disaffiliate the AJDS we should take another tack. It is certainly repugnant too many of us to eject a Jewish organisation from within our midst that purports to support the existence of Israel.
    I used to be a member of the AJDS over ten years ago until I found that the organization was taking on more extreme views with which I could not agree. Today if you go to their website you will find that every news item there takes a negative, antagonistic view to Israel and Zionism on every single issue.
    Within this discussion there have been no defences of the AJDS coming from its members except for Harold Zwier and that to start with is an issue. We need to hear more justification of the AJDS from the AJDS itself in the face of questioning along these lines:
    1. What efforts are being made by the AJDS to counter extreme anti-Zionist attitudes that are pervading our society? (From my experience I have found that the rank and file of AJDS did not generally agree with the views of people like Anthony Loewenstein, but have never really bothered to express their opinions openly.)
    2. Why does the AJDS want to have JCCV affiliation? (Many of us believe that they use it unfairly as a lever to get unrepresentative recognition by the media to push their political bandwagon.)
    3. Does the AJDS believe that as far as a ‘Jewish’ organisation is concerned there is a line somewhere that when crossed should be considered to be unacceptable? (The discussion generally feels that the AJDS walks very cross to a ‘red’ line and it would be beneficial to define clearly where that line is.)

  • Gil Solomon says:

    David, most of us have no wish to hear another word from the AJDS and by suggesting we should give them a chance to justify their stand on this or that implies that you don’t think the evidence is already in.

    They are an anti Zionist, anti Israeli group, many of whose members are probably self hating Jews.

    What more is there to say?

    Their affiliate status to any mainstream Jewish organisation should be terminated immediately and their members never invited to attend a mainstream function. In short, they should be quarantined and not invited anywhere.

    If the JCCV does not throw them out, the entire board should resign and call for new elections.

  • geoffff says:

    To those excellent questions I would add this

    What exactly does the AJDS stand for? What precisely does the AJDS expect of the Jews of the Middle East?

    No abstracts please or woolly radical softcore propaganda from some mass manufactured “save the world” comic. Specifics please.

    Offer the “Palestinians” another Arab Muslim state? Done that as we all know. Overdone it perhaps.

    Offer to enter into direct negotiations with the PA without any pre conditions? That offer is extant as we also know.

    “Withdraw” unilaterally to the “greenline” and hope for the best? Are you insane? Don’t you think you owe the people you are making a suggestion like that some kind of detailed explanation of what you are proposing? Are you embarrassed?

    You should be.

    Accept the Arab Muslim “right of return” and surrender the state’s sovereignty and identity? Are you an antisemite?

    Freeze the “settlements”?

    Is that what this is all about? Do you honestly think that would help with the “Palestinians”? Have you looked at the “Palestinian” leaderships lately? Any of them? Do you really think that is the underlying problem? Have you thought this through? Anyway why are you are a member of a group whose public profile is very much more than what?

    Those who are squeamish about disaffiliating a Jewish group might bear in mind that AJDS is solely a political body with axes to grind with allies in the general community and abroad and it is entitled to be treated as a political group. That includes rejection. I’m sure they would understand this. I have it on excellent authority it does not take much to get expelled from a “Progressive Zionist” group.

    Disaffiliating AJDS does not of course mean that JCCV has disaffiliated AJDS members. Indeed the process might help some to snap out of the delusions that led them to join in the first place.

    http://geofffff.blogspot.com.au/

  • rachel says:

    The disaffiliation of AJDS is long overdue. It’s important to understand the background and history of AJDS, their members and what they really stand for.

    During the last 10 years, since AJDS was eventually accepted as an affiliate of JCCV (after many failed previous attempts), and particularly since the second intifada, the organization had been hijacked by a handful of extremists, who support the “right of return” of Arab Palestinians but not the “right of return” of Jews; who recognize and fight for the rights of Arab refugees but not of Jewish refugees from Arab countries; who believe in national liberation and self determination for all the peoples in the world but oppose the same rights for the Jewish people; who claim that having a Jewish State is racists, but don’t regard Islamic States, or Christian States, as racists. This is the level of their hypocrisy and double standard.

    Regarding their latest BDS campaign, we should be reminded that boycotting of Israel isn’t something new and it’s got nothing to do with settlements – this is being used as an excuse to fool some Useful Idiots – it’s simply a new name and extension of the long standing boycotts by Arabs and Islamic countries (except Egypt and Jordan due to peace treaties) along with their non-recognition of Israel, since the establishment of the Jewish State of Israel.

    AJDS is a tiny elitist group – mainly comprising a few dozens old men – of political activists far removed from the Jewish community, who exploit their almost forgotten Jewish background to propagate and promote their extremist views – at times sheer incitement – not only against Israel but also against the Jewish community, eg recent JNF protest, increase their ego and influence among non Jews, and has emboldened and given encouragement to all those who hate Jews and Israel and fight for its destruction e.g. Friends of Palestine, various Islamic pro Hamas/Hezbollah groups., some Christian churches, and the Greens. They evade accusation of anti Semitism if as “Jewish” members of AJDS, they spruik the same foul abuses about Israel and the Jewish community as their affiliates.

  • Shirlee. says:

    Thank you Rachel. Very succinct.

    This from the Constitution of the JCCV, is the reason why the AJDS should not enjoy the position it does.

    “To intensify the bonds of Victorian Jewry with Israel and to strengthen the ties of
    solidarity with Israel in the community”

    Seems to me they do anything but.

    There are another couple of other points in the Constitution worth noting too.

  • Mike Gold says:

    There’s some real nastiness here. It’s amusing that the same people who will push for Jewish unity (i.e. “resolve your differences in house”) are now coming out asking for a public disaffiliation.

    The issue has now clearly transcended the original AJDS campaign.

    Let’s consider this: the AJDS and its members are very openly saying they consider themselves to be both proud Jews, and proud members of the Jewish community, and therefore want to remain a part of the JCCV/organised establishment community.

    What other criteria are required to be a member of the JCCV? They are not antisemitic (they are anti-settlements – an important and surely easy distinction to comprehend), nor are they anti-Israel (they are, in fact, legitimising Israel by delegitimising the occupation – in their view, at least).

    If you would like to call for a truly reflecting Jewish communal body, then surely the AJDS must be part of that.

    Saying otherwise only creates divisions in the community. And those who say they want widespread Jewish unity will succeed only in dividing it further.

  • Michael Burd says:

    enough talking time for JCCV President & Board to have some balls and get rid if them

  • Shirlee. says:

    @David Schulberg

    Answers to your questions

    1. I don’t think there is any effort at all. It appears to me to be the reverse.

    2. Spot on. It’s a good tool to use where they can show legitimacy as is shown in their letter to Bob Carr.
    “By way of reference, our organisation is an affiliate of the Jewish Community Council of Victoria.”

    3. No.
    They feel they should be affiliated regardless.

    They are now claiming on their web site that there is a push from the right against Jewish critics of Israel. That’s a cop out. I have left leaning friends and they are very opposed to what the Far Left are doing.

    http://www.ajds.org.au/explaining-the-campaign-from-the-right-against-jewish-critics-of-israel/

  • Shirlee. says:

    @Mike Gold

    You most obviously haven’t be following what this vile group has been up to. This has been a long time coming and this current action is merely the icing on the cake.

    If they are proud Jews as you say, they sure have a funny way of showing it. As a proud Jew they should be supporting Israel not doing everything in their power to delegitimise Her.

  • Shirlee. says:

    Bit strong Michael, never the less I agree with you

  • geoffff says:

    AJDS is a political group with an agenda that has no other reason for being than to further its political program. It deserves the respect of being treated as a political such and that includes rejection.
    There is no heritage order on political ideas that have no buyers in the market place. There is no obligation to preserve them like living fossils that have some special status because the proponents happen to be Jews. The JCCV is not required to sustain them. The wider community and friends outside the community can not be expected to deal with attacks and campaigns from a platform that the community has itself provided. Not with all the other campaigns. Enough is enough.

    I’m sure AJDS understands. There is excellent authority that it does not take much to get expelled from “progressive Zionist” groups, at least overseas. Far left groups don’t usually tolerate much in the way of heresy.

    AJDS uses the “settlements” like Scientologists use bait and switch. One minute you are invited to do a free “personality test” and the next you are in a room out the back being told about all the engrams that need auditing before the aliens come back (or whatever).

    The AJDS bait is “do you think ‘settlements’ are an obstacle to peace?”. Not even “the obstacle” or “the main obstacle”. Still very wrong but it is low entry level. Next you are in a room somewhere being lectured about how Jews over a line they refuse to define are illegal, that this should be dealt with in isolation, that Israel must surrender sovereignty and the state by accepting an Arab Muslim “right of return” and the aliens will be along shortly with the “bi-national” state.

    It’s that crazy. It would be funny if wasn’t used so effectively by Israel’s enemies.

    Disaffiliating AJDS is the rejection of crude, simplistic and one sided politics on a vital matter of concern. It does not mean that JCCV has disaffiliated the members. Indeed the process might help some snap out of the delusions that caused them to join AJDS in the first place. They might then think this through.

    http://geofffff.blogspot.com.au/

  • geoffff says:

    AJDS is a political group with an agenda that has no other reason for being than its its political program. It deserves the respect of being treated as such and that includes rejection.

    There is no heritage order on political ideas that have no buyers in the market place. There is no obligation to preserve them like living fossils that have some special status because the proponents happen to be Jews. The JCCV is not required to sustain them. The wider community and friends outside the community can not be expected to deal with attacks and campaigns from a platform that the community has itself provided. Not with all the other campaigns. Enough is enough.

    I’m sure AJDS understands. There is excellent authority that it does not take much to get expelled from “progressive Zionist” groups, at least overseas. Far Leftist groups don’t usually tolerate much in the way of heresy.

    AJDS uses the “settlements” like Scientologists use bait and switch. One minute you are invited to do a free “personality test” and the next you are in a room out the back being told about all the engrams that need auditing before the aliens come back (or whatever).

    The AJDS bait is “do you think ‘settlements’ are an obstacle to peace?”. Not even “the obstacle” or “the main obstacle”. Still very wrong but it is low entry level. Next you are in a room somewhere being lectured about how Jews over some line they refuse to define are illegal, that this should be dealt with in isolation, that Israel must surrender sovereignty and the state by accepting an Arab Muslim “right of return” and the aliens will be along shortly with the “bi-national” state.

    It’s that crazy. It would be funny if wasn’t used so effectively by Israel’s enemies.

    Disaffiliating AJDS is the rejection of crude, simplistic, one sided and ugly politics. It does not mean that JCCV has disaffiliated the members. Indeed the process might help some snap out of the delusions and wishful thinking that caused them to join AJDS in the first place. They might actually think this through.

  • Doodie Ringelblum says:

    Geoffff – you wrote “Because this is a free society the JCCV is also free to disaffiliate a group that wages campaigns that the bulk of its members find repugnant. That is what happens in a liberal democracy”

    Actually that’s what happens in dictatorships. In liberal democracies the general principle is “I may disagree with what you say, but I’ll fight for your right to say it.”

    Gil – you don’t need to hold the majority view to have a seat in a body that calls itself representative of the community.

    Michael and Shirlee – one of my observations from running the In One Voice festival was that most Jews aren’t aware of how diverse the views of the Jewish community is. Unless one deliberately mixes in circles far broader than one’s own views, one doesn’t know the breadth of beliefs in the Jewish community. (I say “one” not “you” coz it applies equally to me)

    For example, the circles I move in would be astounded at your proposition that there are no right-wing groups in the community; or the notion that ADC is left-wing. (Even more so Gil’s idea that the Left dominates communal bodies!) Your (and my) starting position colours very greatly the notion of who is right and left wing. You think NIF is extreme-left, others think Bnai Akiva are extreme right. I don’t see why both (along with AJDS and Friends of Gush Katif and Shomron) can’t still be regarded as important to the health of this community.

    The notion that AIJAC is centrist because it has a self-confessed leftie on its editorial board is like saying Stalin was a philo-semite because he had a Jew on the Politbureau.

    Lastly Michael – don’t you think there is something offensive about calling on Nina Bassat to “have some balls”?

  • Otto Waldmann says:

    Doodie R.

    Funny how you list with such discipline the objections you have to all and sundry who would dare object to ADJS and confer a suitable doze of absurdity to each chapter.
    1st you aduce the notion of “liberal democracy” as the fundamental ….reason (!!!) for a certain group of likeminded people, JCCV,NOT to exercise their right to eject from their midst, in a………liberal democratic way, a sub-group they deem inconsistent with their agenda/ideology/philosophy/chartered principles and etc. To this you accentuate the laughable episode by calling the said liberal democratic body, JCCV again, “dictatorial” . Well, let’s find the dictator, who by definition, must be just ONE bloke/sheilla.

    Then you calmly go on and offend the well informed local audience by classifying certain VERY fringe groups, such as NIF and, again, AJDC as well integrated ideological entities into a fundamentally strong Israel supportive Australian Jewish communities.
    I suggest you apply your analytical mind to the vast cannyon between the deceiving rhetoric of AJDC and NIF of pretend Zionist groups and the core UNWANTED anti Zionist activities they have been engaging in, alongside their respective GENUINE detractive anti Israel statements.

    The very comfortable truth is that JCCV and , indeed, ECAJ do not represent all Jewish voices, but the vast majority of them. Speaking of liberal democracy again, the current Aus. Gov. represents Australians for all intents and purposes, yet, in specific terms it is just a………..Labor Gov. Does it mean, for example, that it is not allowed to enter into any treaties on behalf of ALL Ausies !!!

  • geoffff says:

    “I may disagree with what you say, but I’ll fight for your right to say it.”

    Voltaire was an antisemite.

    I say again that this has nothing to do with free speech. This is not the Socialist Alliance hanging around outside a Geert Wilders meeting. You will find that it is the allies of AJDS who are the enemies of free speech. It is appalling there is so much ignorance about this important principle.

    No one has suggested that there should be any interference with AJDS right to free speech. In our kind of society you couldn’t even if you wanted to. On the contrary AJDS and other “progressive Zionist” cults are being challenged to say exactly what they have in mind in forums where they can expect probing and no soft language (and therefore exposure). That’s free speech.

    Go to my blog and then to the links especially Israel Thrives. These are liberal pro-Israel, pro-American, pro-West political blogs. There you will find free speech. AJDS can have their say there real time and unmoderated any time. The response will also be unmoderated. That’s free speech.

    Free speech does not mean a duty to listen.
    Free speech does not mean you must be supportive and indulgent
    Free speech does not mean free speech for them but not for you
    Free speech does not mean you are not allowed to change the channel
    Free speech does not mean you are required to have them in your home like billets

    That is what happens in dictatorships

  • Shirlee. says:

    @Doodie Ringelblum

    I think you are totally missing the point.

    There is left wing and there is ‘Left Wing’, just as there is right wing and there is ‘Right Wing’ and there are extremes at both ends of the spectrum.

    The point is that when an individual/organisation crosses the line, then one must disassociate with that individual/organisation.

    In my opinion and that of a good many people, being Jews in the Diaspora, it is not our place to criticise, and/or work against the State of Israel. Quite the reverse, we should be supporting her. Moreso at this point in time when there are so many outside sources at work trying hard to bring her down.

    This from the JCCV Constitution pretty much says it all….

    Statement of purposes of the Jewish Community Council of Victoria Incorporated

    (f): To intensify the bonds of Victorian Jewry with Israel and to strengthen the ties of
    solidarity with Israel in the community.

    That section clearly says why the AJDS, or any like organisation, cannot be an affiliate of the JCCV, never mind what their political leanings are.

    The actions of the AJDS in regards to Bob Carr, Green Sunday and now their BDS action against goods produced in the Territories, is more than enough reason for the JCCV to rethink their position in regards to them being an Affiliate . Never mind what their political leanings are left, right or middle.

    The Constitution also says that if financial membership of a constituent is less than 75, they can be disaffiliated. I doubt their membership was ever that number.

    Lastly Doodie in regards to this comment “– don’t you think there is something offensive about calling on Nina Bassat to “have some balls”?”

    Surely you can’t be for real?

    Don’t tell me that you are one of these people that would call a ‘wolf whistle’ sexual harassment please?

    Saying “have some balls” is not literal expression. It means to have strength or courage.
    REALLY !!!

    If that’s all you have to worry about…well? As a woman I don’t have the slightest thing objection with the expression.

  • Jonny Schauder says:

    I’m not an AJDS supporter but the JCCV is meant to be a broad community hub.

    Membership is membership. If the criteria is met, membership must be a given.

    I doubt that any affiliate can be excluded based on “views” particularly on something as clearly controversial as the settlements.

    This is not about free speech it is about the right for dissent and debate amongst members in one of the most intentionally broadest bodies we have.

    Frankly I’m finding a lot of the postings here quite hysterical… Not in the funny sense, but in the disproportionate reaction sense.

    Cast out JCCV members based on their views… Very dangerous precedent…

    Anyway I’m sure there is something in the constitution about affiliates voting on these issues.

    For Gd sake I hope the Board is mature enough to just carefully follow a good and proper process rather than react in a kneejerk and exaggerated way… This is not Ninas decision to make.

    Deep breathing everyone.

  • Jonny Schauder says:

    Sorry Mike Gold. Missed your earlier and very sensible post. Well put and well reasoned. I think my comments were just repetitive of yours … and less effectively put forward.

  • Michael Burd says:

    I never thought I would say we Jews could learn anything from the Muslim community .However one thing is for sure Muslim community members would not be wasting their time having this B——T discussion because there is no way in the wide world the ICV [Islamic Council of Victoria] would ever have fringe extremist groups affiliated with their mainstream community Org that either supported the Israeli narrative , were anti- Palestinian activists or critics of the Muslim community leadership and the majority of Muslim community.

    What does that tell you about us.!

  • Shirlee. says:

    Thank you Michael!!

    @Jonny
    The JCCV Constitution pretty much says it all….

    (f): To intensify the bonds of Victorian Jewry with Israel and to strengthen the ties of
    solidarity with Israel in the community.

    It seems to me that the AJDS is doing the reverse.

    This is not an hysterical knee jerk and exaggerated reaction to this vile antisemitic action proposed by the AJDS. If you follow their web site you will see that just in very recent times.

    Bob Carr, Green Sunday and now this all in a matter of months.

    What don’t you and others get about the fact we have an ‘enemy within’?

  • geoffff says:

    “I doubt that any affiliate can be excluded based on “views” particularly on something as clearly controversial as the settlements.

    “This is not about free speech it is about the right for dissent and debate amongst members in one of the most intentionally broadest bodies we have.

    “Frankly I’m finding a lot of the postings here quite hysterical…”

    Give me a break.

    Hysterical? In some circles that would be known as “projection.”

    We are not talking about someone in the Jewish Male Voice Choir (also an affiliate) singing out of tune.

    The AJDS is a political pressure group that exists ONLY because of its “views”. Moreover it uses its affiliation to project its “views” to the community at large knowing as it does that its “views” jar mightily with those of the JCCV. In doing so it usurps the role of the JCCV and seeks to deaden its message.

    No one can seriously doubt that this BDS campaign AJDS just launched will be used by the indisputably antisemitic BDS movement and it is impossible not to believe that was intended. It’s on a website that’s probably already been emailed all around the world.

    At the AJDS website there is this among its noble goals:

    “And in partnership with the State Zionist Council of Victoria:

    “- A more sophisticated public understanding of Israel’s efforts to achieve peace and security

    “- Effective counteraction of misinformation on Israel, the Middle East and the Arab/Israel conflict

    “- A more sophisticated public understanding of Israel in relation to contemporary Jewish identity.”

    The JCCV can either strive with commitment to achieve those goals on behalf of the community that shares it. Or it can have AJDS as an affiliate.

    It can not do both.

  • geoffff says:

    That of course should read

    At the JCCV website there is this among its noble goals:

  • Jonny Schauder says:

    Your black and whiteness is scary.

  • Doodie Ringelblum says:

    Michael – I think your last comment summarises what I don’t understand about your thinking and I’d be grateful if you could elaborate.

    Are you saying the best thing would be:

    – if we were less tolerant of diversity and dissent (which you say is the position of the ICV)
    – if the ICV was more tolerant of diversity and dissent
    – if we watch the level of tolerance at the ICV and scale up or down accordingly?

    You criticise the Muslim world for its lack of tolerance – but then seem to suggest we should use that as a model for our communal approach.

    Sorry if I’ve misunderstood you, but that is how I read it.

  • rachel says:

    Thank you Geoff. AJDS has gone too far with their BDS campaign which has gone viral on Facebook. It’s interesting to note that their vicious BDS campaign coincides with the global hateful, hysterical “Israel Apartheid Week” campaign. No doubt it’s been a deliberate and well orchestrated-co-coordinated move to cause maximum damage to Israel’s reputation. It’s very clear AJDS has become willing political partner of Israel’s arch enemies. This is a disgrace. Thank you Geoff. AJDS has gone too far with their BDS campaign which has gone viral on Facebook. It’s interesting to note that their vicious BDS campaign coincides with the global hateful, hysterical “Israel Apartheid Week” campaign. No doubt it’s been a deliberate and well orchestrated-co-coordinated move to cause maximum damage to Israel’s reputation and aimed at weakening Israel’s legitimacy.

    It’s very clear AJDS has become a willing political partner of Israel’s arch enemies. .

  • Philip Mendes says:

    AJDS and JCCV

    http://galusaustralis.com/2013/03/6948/jccv-to-disaffiliate-ajds/

    It doesn’t surprise me that the JCCV is considering disaffiliating AJDS. This possibility has been on the agenda for a while. Not surprisingly, I have mixed feelings about this course of action.

    Historically, there is a world of difference between the politics and personnel of AJDS pre-2000 and post the Second Palestinian Intifada. The earlier AJDS from approximately 1985-2000 was the only organisation in the Melbourne Jewish community (as the sister organisation of the Sydney Jewish Left) that consistently supported a two state solution in what was then a very conservative Australian Jewry.

    The exclusion of AJDS from the JCCV in 1987 at the behest of some very arrogant leaders of the Zionist movement at that time greatly embarrassed the Jewish community. I was not at that time a member of AJDS, but joined soon after at least in part because I was so appalled by that episode. The AJDS seemed to symbolize democratic and pluralist debate in the Jewish community as many non-Left commentators noted at the time.

    Much changed after September 2000. The Jewish mainstream shifted sharply to adopt a two-state perspective. AJDS included new activists whose politics were primarily of the universalistic Left with very little interest in or respect for what the Jewish mainstream thought. There were a number of one-sided pro-Palestinian statements made by AJDS that seemed highly insensitive at the height of the Palestinian suicide bombings directed at Israeli civilians within the Green Line. A number of AJDS members who still considered themselves to represent a Jewish Left perspective, but thought that any Jewish-identifying organisation should have a basic position of solidarity with the Israeli Jewish people, were either directly driven out of the organisation (my experience), or more quietly discontinued their involvement.

    The AJDS position seemed to revolve around what their allies in the pro-Palestinian Left thought mattered. They did not try to find a reasonable mid-way compromise between the Palestinian lobbyists and the Jewish mainstream. Rather, they tried to sit mid-way between the hardline Palestinian lobby and the slightly less extreme Palestinian lobby. This culminated in their August 2010 vote in favour of a BDS boycott of settlement goods. Their decision was praised by hardline pro-BDS boycott advocates all over the world as cited in David Landy’s pro-BDS book Jewish Identify and Palestinian Rights (pp.101 & 162).

    I understand that successive JCCV Presidents since 2001 have attempted to communicate to AJDS that inclusion in the Jewish mainstream involves responsibilities as well as rights. And others on the Left have also tried to make the point that being a Jewish Left organisation sometimes means prioritizing particularist Jewish interests and concerns over other universalistic concerns. The AJDS response has not been positive, and has seemed to involve little more than a wall of silence.

    I do not personally want to see any organisation excluded from the JCCV on political grounds. I suspect AJDS will wrongly proclaim themselves to be martyrs of free speech if that happens. I also suspect that it will send a very bad message to the Jewish and broader community about the apparent limits of acceptable opinion in the Jewish mainstream. But equally, ADJS need to understand that the community don’t have unlimited patience for those whose political loyalties always seem to lie with the pro-Palestinian Left rather than the Jewish community (i.e. as in AJDS’ notorious support for the anti-Zionist fundamentalists at Overland Magazine). If AJDS still want to be included then they need to stop excluding themselves.

    Philip Mendes

  • Philip Mendes says:

    On the Overland Affair, see the following link:
    http://www.antidef.org.au/secure/downloadfile.asp?fileid=1011809

  • Gil Solomon says:

    The AJDS members, if they’re reading all this, must be laughing hysterically.

    Their well documented stance aids Israel’s enemies, yet well meaning Jews are still debating whether or not their affiliate status with the JCCV should be be terminated or not.

    When will Australian Jews ever wake up out of their coma?

  • Jonny Schauder says:

    Thanks Philip. The education is appreciated.

  • Michael Burd says:

    Doodie,
    I would have thought my comments were self explanatory and the obvious reason why the Palestinian narrative is predominately the only one in town.
    However since you asked I will give you some of my own thoughts on the matter.

    Firstly unlike the eloquent Mr Mendes [who I notice over the years has changed his views on Israel more in line with the mainstream ] obviously I have no academic background but what I do have instead is my own worldly experience which most of the academics only read about .I spent nearly 30 years working in joint venture Business relationships out of Places like Pakistan [ I had a joint venture factory in Karachi in the 1970’s ], India, Malaysia, Indonesia where I had clothing factories commuted only an almost bimonthly basis and have a pretty good idea on the Muslim mindset .

    Instead of making this whole issue complicated I believe it should be brought down to either you are with us or against us [ yes as a an ex -American President once stated] .

    Firstly lets get it straight it is not a Israeli- Palestinian conflict it is a Israeli- Arab/Muslim conflict. We have no land or settlement disputes with Iran who have declared war against Israel and the Jews [ Even Pakistan sent their Air force to join the Arabs in 1973 or 67 ? war] We have no disputes with Indonesia , Malaysia or UAE or most of the other 57 Islamic member countries yet they are in de -facto state of war against Israel and the Jews i.e their immigration discriminates against Israeli Jews and they promote antisemitism in their countries and mostly do not even recognize their fellow UN state exists.

    In a perfect world it would be ok for our community to support Anti- Israel pro- Palestinian activists like AJDS if equally the other side i.e the Muslim community also promoted these type of extremist , fringe groups.

    If our media , Universities, Human rights/Civil rights Orgs , Trade Unions all treated this conflict in a fair and balanced way and not sided with the Palestinians. If our current FM didn’t make demands from one side and not the other . If our largest Jewish community study department at Monash didn’t have their departments views on Israel more closely aligned to the Islamic Study department this would be a situation where if the JCCV supported Palestinian activist groups may be acceptable.

    However what we have is not only the Jewish dissidents like AJDS and others promoting the same pro Palestinian line as everyone else.

    The ICV which represents the bulk of Victorian Muslims take the attitude that no matter what difference they have with each other . I.e Shea/ Sunni etc they strictly support and promote the Palestinian narrative only and that is why the Palestinian narrative is the only one in town. Most importantly they do not suffer any rejection from the Mainstream community by taking this attitude in fact they are overly supported.

    So to answer your question yes we must lower or standards if you think the JCCV having a 5 th Column fringe group as affiliates is a normal standard.

  • rachel says:

    I urge you all to have a look at this page which is only a tiny fraction of the huge sophisticated well financed propaganda war machine of the pro Arab forces waged against Israel. Can you imagine the consequences for Israel if this relentless onslaught continues for much longer?

    http://www.facebook.com/IAcknowledgeApartheidExists

    I let you answer the question: Do you want to see any Jewish organisation, which is part of the Jewish community, being part of this vicious campaign to deligitimise Israel and dehumanise its Jewish people? I certainly don’t!

  • rachel says:

    Come on guys. Have a look what’s going on Facebook. Right now to mark Easter there is another well organised orechastrated,expensive campaign of hatred and incitement again Israel “Apartheid” to appeal to world Christians. The page had professional Administrators, one of which is staffer of an American Democaric Senator Ford.

    Do something about getting FB to close it down

    http://www.facebook.com/IAcknowledgeApartheidExists
    Nicola Simmonds It would appear that he is a paid employee of Senator Ford
    State Senate Staffer Reported Doing Political Work on State Time | Humphrey on the Hill
    blogs.knoxnews.com
    A Tennessee Senate staffer appears to have been doing political work while colle…cting a full-time state paycheck, an apparent violation of state law, public records and documents reviewed by TNReport

  • Paul Grunfeld says:

    Philip Mendes

    One must be careful with labeling groups as “left”, as has been the case with AJDS, for a number of simple reasons.
    For a group or an individual to belong to the left, as traditionally known, one would expect a fairly well educated content of what, indeed, the left means. Somehow I have the feeling that those seen as marching under the left banner in our present context would not be the kind of left such as, say, Mr. Karl Marx, Mr. Lukacs Gyorgy or in the even distant circles of one Adorno or Kolakowski. So why waste something of some resepctability on a bunch of hysterical activists who are, most clearly, unhappy with the core Jewish comunity to which maybe they once belonged.
    AJDS are not promoting anything that defines the left. They are a distant, but incredibly useful, attachment to the much wider international onslaught against the Zionist front, stretching from Zion itself to the entire Diaspora devoted to defending Israel.
    They use language repleet with social justice phraseology and that makes them only a milder extention of the more virulent Palestinian and general Islamist propaganda machine. This is the main and sufficient reason JCCV arrived at the rational concluson that AJDS is not compatible with JCCV’s charter.
    It must be said that liberal democracies function exactly on the principle of the freedom of a given entity to decide who may or may not be part of their entity. Dictatorship is when Messrs. AJDS would compell JCCV to keep them as members, against the liberally democratic decision of the majority of JCCV to have them excluded.

  • Daniel Levy says:

    @PaulGrunfeld, I’ll take “Tyranny of the Majority” for 20 points.

    You have no understanding of what democracy looks like.

  • Paul Grunfeld says:

    Daniel Levy

    You may not use the excuse of a brief retort to say that “more can be said and you haven’t had the chance to explain the apparent contradiction between democracy and its denial by the tyrany of the majority.”
    By definition of the term, there must be a significant minority that would be oppressed by your “tyrany of the majority”.
    In our case AJDS is being treated within the very genuine princples of a liberal democracy not only because its numerical composition is less than insignficant, but because the minority seen at AJDS is itself causing to oppress JCCV, the very body it was accepted in originally on the very genuine principles of a democratic exercise. More importantly, though, AJDS is not at all oppresse by anyone, it is not being rendered inoperative, llegal, its activities are not at all impeded, interfered with by any “illegitimate, tyrannical authority”. AJDS is still using its name, composition etc., none of its members or offices are affected by anyone, they can “trade” their “chattels” freely, they are in actual fact publshing their own stuff on their own web as well as right here, so where did you locate that “tyranny” cum persecution ???
    The most relevant issue is that, as they have been objecting to the very ideology of the real majority of he JCCV, the “invited” departure from its ranks is the most logical move, consistent not only with JCCV’s positions , but with AJDS’s body of politics and practices. So, Mr. Levy, can we conclude that you have no undersatnding what democracy looks like and, to boot, you have also missed out the subsatnce of the very issue we are debating here !!!
    Without your unncessary permission, the reasonable answer is: YES.

  • Gil Solomon says:

    After all that has been said (95 comments to date), I come to three conclusions why those who post to this topic in continual defence of the AJDS affiliate status do so.

    1. They are self hating Jews who despise everything Israel stands for and would like to see continued debate in the form of their endless responses, which they hope will influence the uninformed or ignorant to their cause.

    2. They are members of the AJDS who will never change their views on anything, who could just as well be in category 1 above.

    3. They are anti semites or anti Israel proponents of whatever background who love watching well meaning Jews go round and round in circles debating the meaning of right wing, left wing, democracy, inclusion, exclusion, etc. etc. ad nauseam.

    To indulge these people in debate any further seems to be a farce as they have an answer to everything in order to justify their stance.

    All I can say is that the majority of the Jewish community find their views repugnant and want them out of our sight.

    If any Muslims are reading all this they must be hysterical with joy watching Jews go down this self destruct road. Imagine Muslims carrying on like this? Does anyone in their right mind seriously think that an anti Muslim group could ever get affiliate status to one of their mainstream organisations?

    I would remind you all that the 2nd Temple fell at, coincidentally, a time when there was disunity in the then Jewish world.
    Beware, we reap what we sew.

  • Michael Burd says:

    Gil,

    A M E N. !!!!!

  • Daniel Levy says:

    Paul, you and Otto are birds of an illiterate feather.

    That you think the AJDS is somehow oppressing the JCCV speaks volumes to your paranoid delusion.

  • Reality Check says:

    If any Muslims read these comments they will probably think how hateful Jews are towards each other. Arch enemies of Israel, self-hating Jews etc. etc: vile, hateful language against their fellow Jews because they think differently to them. Burd Solomon and co. resemble a lynch mob the way they are inciting hatred towards the AJDS. Read what they say and then read what those who call for a reasonable debate say, and see who the extremists are. If Muslims read these comments they will think what a hateful lot these Jews are.

  • geoffff says:

    You can be pretty certain that there are no Muslims reading these comments. None with good intent anyway.

    Lynch mob? Inciting hatred? Extremists?

    You have lost the argument and my guess is you know it.

  • Reallity Check says:

    And the extremist Muslims will probably think that the Jews of the right are no different to us.

  • Reallity Check says:

    Argument? What argument? You can’t argue with extremists

  • Gil Solomon says:

    Reallity Check, whoever you are.

    IT’S OVER.
    Your three posts in the space of about an hour can only be seen as a sign of desperation on your part.

    Your comments are the typical “diversionary/endless dialogue” tactics I was referring to. They don’t work anymore.

    In my opinion, you clearly fit into one of the 3 categories mentioned in my above post.

    With that in mind, I refuse to even bother to addrerss your comments and think others should do likewise.

  • Shirlee. says:

    Joint statement from Philip Chester, President, Zionist Federation of Australia and Sam Tatarka President of the Zionist Council of Victoria:

    The Zionist movement in Australia is appalled by the Australian Jewish Democratic Society’s campaign which encourages people not to buy products produced in Israeli communities beyond the Green Line. The idea that a Jewish organisation that purports to be a part of our community supports (even a part of) the insidious campaign of delegitimisation being waged by Israel’s enemies is not only repugnant and immoral but also unfathomable.

    The leaders said: “Campaigns that work to deepen the divide rather than encouraging mutual respect and recognition delay rather than hasten the true and lasting peace for which we all hope.”

  • Jonny Schauder says:

    Reality Check bothered to keep going with you Gil. I’m not at all connected to the AJDS but probably like many others in this chain accepted how closed minded your observations were a long time ago and moved on.

    Here’s to seeing if a the JCCV Board can deal with its own affiliates professionally, appropriately and intelligently rather than getting caught up in the hype.

    I’m sure from here, despite the press release, that Nina and her team can run the review of the alignment of the AJDS to the JCCV affiliate criteria without using language like “repugnant” or resorting to name calling.

  • Otto Waldmann says:

    Daniel

    Just because more than one person has identified your illogical line of so called thought does not mean that there is only…. one person as such. If you look carefully right here there are heaps more who say waht I say abt you. Paul Grunfield is right and you are wrong again. I reckon that the idea that AJDS is oppressing JCCV is a good one and, in fact, that is just one matter raised by the “same feather” Grunfield. Al other points he put out regarding your not so funny interpretation of liberal democracy are valid and I noticed that you did not object to them at all.
    I have been on the move between Spain and France in the past few days and had no chance to get stuck into these issues, but don’t worry Daniel, illitrate or not , you are very close to my critical sights – yet nothing compared with the sights of Barcelona or Navarra…..

  • Gil Solomon says:

    Jonny,

    I notice that the joint statement by the Zionist organisations referred to the AJDS support of the insidious campaign of delegitimisation as “repugnant, immoral and unfathomable.”

    So please spare me your indignation.

  • Shirlee. says:

    Jonny I have been following the saga of the JCCV versus the AJDS for good while.

    The AJDS has been like a festering sore to the JCCV for a long time. This incident has caused that sore to burst. I think Executive have made their minds up what they want to do.

    I have questions in regards to the ‘legalities’ of the AJDS being an affiliate of the JCCV. One of the being that the need to have a minimum of 75 current financial members. I doubt they do.

    I don’t have issues with people differing in point of view. I do draw the line at Jews being antisemitic, which is what the ADS movement and actions are about.As such I don’t think they should be given oxygen.

  • letters in the age says:

    Absolutism is toxic…….

    Wrong way go another route guys

    ;)

  • Daniel Levy says:

    “The leaders said”

    What a chillingly Orwellian choice of words.

  • Daniel Levy says:

    Otto, the mindless blatherings of wingnuts do not merit a response beyond an expression of disdain for their selfish, compassionless and proudly ignorant drek of a worldview.

  • Jonny says:

    I trust Shirli has quoted them correctly Gil.

    If so the statement is full of extraordinary sweeping statements, bizarre absolutes, and aggressive name calling… It doesn’t make it more persuasive, it makes it sad and a bit embarrassing.

    As if the settlement movement is some simple unidimensional issue that we all agree on in “our” community.

  • Shirlee. says:

    I have Jonny. Copied and pasted from the ZFA website. Upset you’d question it.

    http://www.zfa.com.au/2013/04/03/appalling-ajds-settlement-boycott/

  • Not sure why the fuss over the ZFA/ZCV statement – they are Zionist orgs, and the AJDS is taking a position that is poles apart from that of most people who call themselves Zionists.

    The JCCV, on the other hand, is a roof body for Jewish orgs, with a diversity of views regarding Zionism. It will be up to their executive & membership to decide whether AJDS should remain a member. The key debate is not on these pages, but rather amongst the leadership of all the JCCV member orgs, and the leadership of the JCCV itself. In theory, they would reflect, in aggregate, the broad view of the community itself regarding the AJDS.

  • Wolf says:

    If AJDS wishes to boycott Jewish goods, for whatever reason, it should be given the flick.

  • Gil Solomon says:

    David, how far is this diversity of views to go?

    By their own recent comments on many issues, the AJDS would seem to be more at home as an affiliate of Hamas than the JCCV and it is incomprehensible that they were allowed in.

    Taking your argument to its logical conclusion, then what you are implying is that members of the community have no right to express an opinion on this forum or anywhere else as to what the JCCV should or should not do. You’re virtually saying we should collectively just put our head in the sand and let those on the board decide!

    Actually, I’ve been saying for some time now that Jews need to take an interest in the various mainstream organisations representing them, start attending meetings and try to be elected to the various boards in order to change the political direction.

  • Gil,

    “how far is this diversity of views to go?” That is exactly the issue at hand here. Jews for Palestine are not members of the JCCV. My view is that the current AJDS campaign bears too much similarity to the BDS campaign and therefore has crossed the line. The challenge for the JCCV is to articulate a reasonable boundary that is acceptable to its members.

    Certainly members of the community have the right to express their opinions. Leaders should take note of the opinions expressed (both publicly and directly to them, but probably more the latter) in determining the sentiment of their constituency, and therefore their position on this issue.

    Totally agree with you regarding the involvement of Jews in the orgs that (like it or not) represent them. That’s the only way to ensure that the orgs truly do represent them, rather than being dominated by small & vocal factions. There is a lot of complaining about orgs in our community by people who are totally outside those orgs. The most effective way to effect change is from within.

  • Jonny Schauder says:

    Shirli we are all more complex than this discussion gives credit for:

    Im a very active Jew
    I’m not supportive of the settlement movement
    I’m not supportive of boycotting anything formally
    I am not supportive of a one state solution because of the practicalities.
    I do favour a two state solution where Israel thrives safely within its borders
    I do believe that irrespective of what enemies do we must do all we can do to live “good” values
    I don’t accept all Muslims are extremists
    I don’t think all Palestinians are enemies
    I never want Israel to be an extremist theocracy
    I think it is terrible to say that if you are anti settlements then you are antisemitic or even anti Israel. The settlements are a government policy that can be stopped or accelerated by the elected body’s view. And I think all elected bodies must be subject to scrutiny for decisions.
    I don’t think settlements of the nature we are seeing are good for Israel long term.
    I have incredible admiration for Israelis who are anti settlement letting their kids go to guard these debelopments as part of their military obligation.

    Complex huh?

    Waiting to hear what Gil labels me. or whether Michael will cast me out as his enemy… Coz you’re either in or out. Would Philip or Sam call me repugnant? Maybe, depends on what you think Zionism includes.

  • Jonny,

    It’s interesting that 8 out of 12 of your personal “I” statements are framed in the negative. What proportion of Jews define themselves by what they are vs what they are not?

    Views such as yours are reflected perfectly in the Israeli political landscape. The election is simply the opening move for negotiations between a multitude of small parties trying to find common ground.

  • Mandi Katz says:

    Jonny – thanks for the sanity. I admire your (and others’ – Doodie, David) willingness to keep commenting civilly and thoughtfully – notwithstanding the likelihood of personal abuse, insults and name calling.

    David – I think lots of things develop most sharply in opposition. It’s often the case that seeing what we don’t want to be and what is unacceptable, is a lot more clear than articulating positively what it is that we do want to be.

    And consider the role for this in Jewish life – no less than the ten commandments.

    The first is a broad statement of principle – a kind of mission statement.And then there are seven negative commandments and only two positive commandments.

    I don’t think that defining oneself by what one is not, is a lesser kind of identity.

  • Jonny Schauder says:

    Interesting guys! Thanks Mandi and David. I sketched that all out very quickly… Interesting the way it played out on the page.

    David I agree with what you’ve been writing too. Interestingly my experience not just of our community but of boards generally is that they don’t handle these moments of critical process management well.

    In doing so they don’t fulfil their governance responsibilities, instead succumbing to rhetoric and emotion.

    There have been too many examples of Boards and leaders getting sucked into spirals of group think..

    Removal of membership in the community in so many examples that we all know of just doesn’t go well unless managed calmly, systematically and dispassionately.

  • Shirlee. says:

    David and Jonny, where do I start you both raise complex issues.?

    David: I agree with “the current AJDS campaign bears too much similarity to the BDS campaign and therefore has crossed the line.” Their actions of late have also been troublesome. I’ve been following their antics for a while. We’ve had the Bob Carr incident where they used their affiliation with the AJDS to give them legitimacy “By way of reference, our organisation is an affiliate of the Jewish Community Council of Victoria.” Then we had the ‘Green Sunday’ incident, which they claim wasn’t their initiative but that of others. I question that given that one of their executive was involved and it was posted on their Facebook page.

    In regards to changing how and who gets involved in Community Organisations is a huge one. I got myself elected as a Deputy on the NSW B of Deps for that very reason and I find it’s an uphill battle. The Left has too large a hold on it and because of that those on the Right aren’t interested enough to get involved.

    Jonny: Wow! Unless I go through each comment of yours individually, I can’t answer you and I don’t have time or space here. Some things will never happen unless Israel has a peace partner, which she doesn’t.

    One thing I will say is that I have no issue with so called ‘settlements’, which only occupy 1.7% of Judea and Samaria and will be traded in any land swap deal as part of a future peace deal, which I doubt will ever happen. One only has to see the maps and logos of the would-be peace partners to know that.

    Judea and Samaria is the heart and soul of Israel, where most of our history lies and to see what these young people have achieved and continue to do it brings tears to my eyes. I was so moved when I saw it all

  • geoffff says:

    It is, if by doing that you are attempting to define those who reject the basic line of a group that most everyone else in the community finds so repugnant in so many ways that they want to make it very clear they have no part of it. Then it becomes the stuff of a very poor kind of identity. Made of straw.

    I don’t live in Victoria and therefore am not a constituent of the JCCV. But that doesn’t matter for me because the AJDS calls itself a national body and that is taken at face value. That means the AJDS is a problem for all Australian Jews and I hope that it borne in mind when the JCCV decides on this.

    It would be anyway whatever the name. Not just Australian Jews. Being opposed to Israeli “settlement” policy is not antisemitism even if you are not an Israeli and therefore taking a position that is safe and comfortable for you and no doubt makes you more acceptable in the circles you choose to be. It is not antisemitism but it should certainly not be confused with courage.

    On the other hand putting your name to a campaign against Jews living where you think they should not be, even without knowing as you must that the campaign will be gleefully used by the BDS scum, and worse, in their wider campaigns should force a little self reflection among AJDS members about what they really want to be associated with.

    Perhaps they might choose to disaffiliate themselves. One would hope at least they would think this thing through.

  • geoffff says:

    That comment was addressed to Mandi Katz.

  • Shirlee. says:

    For those who may not have seen it. This in in today’s AJN

    Executive Council of Australian Jewry president Dr Danny Lamm described the move as “a misguided and empty gesture that will be completely rejected by the vast majority of people in the Jewish community”.

    “The AJDS has succumbed to the myth that settlements are the major impediment to Middle East peace. That notion has been thoroughly discredited, as has the idea that a boycott of any kind can make a constructive contribution to peace between Israel and the Palestinians.”

    I agree with Geoff and had never thought of it before, this issue with the AJDS is a National one being that the AJDS is a National organisation and not a State one

  • geoffff says:

    By the way

    This comment is also addressed to Mandi Katz who said this:

    “Jonny – thanks for the sanity. I admire your (and others’ – Doodie, David) willingness to keep commenting civilly and thoughtfully – notwithstanding the likelihood of personal abuse, insults and name calling.”

    That is not the only example of that side of the debate here pre-emptively complaining about “name calling”. There are even a couple of instances where these commenters have pre emptively called themselves “self hating Jews” on behalf of those who are merely calling for the disaffiliation of AJDS.

    This is a bizarre phenomenon of the far left that deserves some attention. It fair reeks of the spurious and incessant complaint from anti-Israel activists about being accused of antisemitism for “being a critic of Israeli policy” when no such accusation has ever been made. It is an example of the “pre-emptive offensive denial” that is always deployed by antizionists just before saying something antisemitic.

    For the record I’ve just scanned this thread and all I can find that fit the description “personal abuse, insults and name calling” are these:

    “Otto, the mindless blatherings of wingnuts do not merit a response beyond an expression of disdain for their selfish, compassionless and proudly ignorant drek of a worldview.”

    “Burd Solomon and co. resemble a lynch mob the way they are inciting hatred towards the AJDS. Read what they say and then read what those who call for a reasonable debate say, and see who the extremists are. If Muslims read these comments they will think what a hateful lot these Jews are.”

    I don’t need to say from which side those comments came from.

    What would you call this? Projection? Cognitive dissonance?

    Whatever it’s called it is also a hallmark of the anti-Israel left and it never fails to send a shiver down my spine whenever I encounter it.

  • Paul Grunfeld says:

    Mr Levy

    Let’s be honest here. Your flaunting of terminology such as “tyrany of the majority” is just an exercise in trumpeting an improvisation of knowledge. If you were well aware of the complexity of the theory, you would have known that pertinent objections to the “tyrany of majority” included the idea of the “Public Choice Theory” which maintains precisely that the aggregation of individual intersts lead to the democratic policy being biased in favor of expressed intersts, having as a consequence the prevalence of irrational beliefs and political decisions. See Bryan Caplan on that because he, unlike you, knows what he is talking about. Look, there is nothing wrong ( for a laugh ) with mimicking competence, but don’t overdo it.
    So far, on ths site alone you have been observed being more of a Rabbi than a Rabbi and generally more of a Moishe than Moishe. What happens consistently with improvised knowledge when the game is up is ( as also amply seen at you ) the virulent use of obnoxious retorts.That much I do take you seriously – as in the serious affliction I urge you to look into before you regale us with your next tantrum.

  • Paul Grunfeld says:

    For the general use, AJDS are exploiting their marginal communal views not just for the obvious self benefit of survival instincts ,but with the gusto and fervor of a dedicated anti establishment mob. They are most definitely anti- Israel established authorities as well as anti local, Australian, communal recognised authority. So far, for the past unbearable affiliation to the JCCV they did it with aplomb from within. They have no reason (!!!) to discontinue their policies once they will be out of the communal loop. Most important is the FACT that, appart from our obsession with them, AJDS are of no consequence in the larger scheme of things. To this extent, while it is necessary to object to whatever they say and do, allowing them excessive space, even a highly critical one, could be to the benefit of their amplified self delusion of communal relevance. We must say our piece, but, by the same time one week after their ejection from JCCV, we would be well and comfy with the necessary communal clean-up and continue everything we must do as opposed to AJDS.Sic transit gloria mundi, not to mention the relevance of any argument in favor of AJDS and against their dismissal.

  • Daniel Levy says:

    Paul, “What happens consistently with improvised knowledge when the game is up is ( as also amply seen at you ) the virulent use of obnoxious retorts.”

    Paul Grunfeld should have a chat to Paul Grunfeld on this issue. It seems your stock in trade is bald-faced hypocrisy.

    Regarding your illogical ramblings about AJDS somehow having power over the majority, how can you honestly say that with a straight face when they are clearly a group so far on the fringes that they’re about to be kicked out of their own community? It is obvious to anybody with half a brain that they are the ones being oppressed. AJDS has very little, if any, power or influence. They are trying their hardest to get their message across, sure, but the reaction to them is so blindingly hostile it’s a wonder that JCCV and ZFA/ZCV has lost their collective marbles about it.

    I would liken this situation to trying to nuke a fly.

  • Paul Grunfeld says:

    Daniel Levy

    The very presence of AJDS within the “umbrella” of JCCV, with all the rights and privileges attached, have allowed AJDS to undermine persistently and with impunity the function JCCV has under its charter. Everyone, including AJDS themselves, has insisted on the large chasm in ideological terms between the core Jewish organisations belonging to JCCV and AJDS.
    As in my previous posting, the size of the “obstracteur” (sic) is irrelevant, as the intensity and virulence of the minority applying pressure on the smooth running of the organisation it belongs to could be proportionally dislodged. It is obvious that JCCV have taken the drastic and seemingly unprecedented move of exclusion precisely as a result of the unbearable pressure exerted upon them by AJDS’s behaviour. This has been an ongoing phenomenon, not an isolated case of a “breach”. So, the notion of pressure is adequate and yours of flies being nuked is not.
    Incidentally, latest I admired my face in the mirror, guess what, no traces of hypocrisy. Big, smirky smiles, heaps, so, please do carry on……….

  • Michael Burd says:

    Geoff I think Gil and my views reflect the majority of the mainstream community , you are welcome to support these extremist fringe group of 5 th Communist Jews and I’m sure they do Muslim community proud.

    Executive Council of
    Australian Jewry

    MEDIA RELEASE
    28 March 2013
    Australian Jewish Democratic Society (‘AJDS’)

    Dr Danny Lamm and Peter Wertheim, the President and the Executive Director of the Executive Council of Australian Jewry, sharply criticized the call by the Australian Jewish Democratic Society for a boycott of products from the West Bank, describing it as “a misguided and empty gesture that will be completely rejected by the vast majority of people in the Jewish community, and by fair-minded people everywhere.”
    According to Lamm and Wertheim, “the AJDS has succumbed to the myth that settlements are the major impediment to Middle East peace. That notion has been thoroughly discredited, as has the idea that a boycott of any kind can make a constructive contribution to peace between Israel and the Palestinians.”

    Asked whether the AJDS should remain formally affiliated with the Jewish community, Lamm and Wertheim said, “the AJDS campaign is repugnant to the strong anti-BDS policies of every Jewish communal roof body in Australia, and to the ECAJ platform of support for Israel and its legitimacy as the State of the Jewish people. In those circumstances, it is hypocritical for the AJDS to maintain its affiliation with the Jewish Community Council of Victoria. If the motive for continuing that affiliation is to preserve the appearance that the AJDS is a legitimate part of the mainstream Jewish community, then its behaviour is also misleading. The AJDS should not remain a part of the JCCV while it pursues policies that are so fundamentally at odds with those of the JCCV and the ECAJ.”

    Contact:

    Peter Wertheim AM | Executive Director
    phone: 02 8353 8500 | m: 0408 160 904 | fax 02 9361 5888
    e: pwertheim@ecaj.org.au | http://www.ecaj.org.au

  • Shirlee. says:

    Michael

    You’ve misconstrued what Geoff said. He most certainly does NOT ***support these extremist fringe group of 5th Communist Jews***

    If you check his comment,he was addressing Mandi Katz, his words were in inverted commas, he was quoting what someone else had said.

  • Wolf says:

    Maybe AJDS would feel more welcome with other radical extremists that boycott Jews, like, I don’t know, the Islamic Brotherhood, or something like that.

  • Michael Burd says:

    Sorry Geoff I misread what you had written and re direct my comment to who you were quoting
    M/s Mandi Katz [ & her fellow travelers at ACJC]

  • Shirlee. says:

    Thank you Michael

  • geoffff says:

    Pay a visit to my blog Michael (the link is at the name). I don’t think there should ever be much doubt about where I am coming from on this.

    Thanks Shirlee for clearing that up.

  • Mandi Katz says:

    Name calling on both sides is pathetic.

    My comment was that people like David W(who I think would clearly identify as of the right), Doodie and Jonny (who are centrist or left leaning)bring sanity and civilty to the discussion.

    Geoffff if you read my words as being directed exclusively against one side of the political spectrum, I suggest you re-read them and you will find that there is no basis for doing so.

  • geoffff says:

    Fine Mandi. I’m happy to drop the matter if you are.

  • Michael Burd says:

    I think we can do without your ever so patronizing comments as well Mandi….

  • Shirlee. says:

    Touché Michael

  • Reality Check says:

    The hysteria coming from Burd, Shirlee, Solomon and now Mr Wolf (Muslim Brotherhood, really!, is becoming pretty embarrassing. If you people are the voice of who should or shouldn’t be members of the JCCV, then count me out.

  • Shirlee. says:

    Get a life Reality Check.

    Hysteria

    Maybe you should have a reality check?

  • Reality Check says:

    Get a life really check, OK I will, and thanks.You see what sort of people I have to deal with here!

  • Wolf says:

    @ Reality Check,

    Just because people are offended that a group of Jews are boycotted by a group of fanatics (ironically themselves mostly Jews, AJDS!), does not make them ‘hysteric’.

    Just because people have a difference of personal opinion, also does not make them hysteric.

    You have to learn to accept that whether you like or don’t like other peoples opinions is you choice. But a decent person at least respects those opinions regardless of whether you personally agree or disagree.

  • Reallity Check says:

    Wolf its’t just to think that AJDS are a bunch of extremists like the Islamic Brotherhood, I think you mean the Muslim Brotherhood, is a pretty hysterical stance to take. I suspect you also would lump them with the Iranian regime who want to wipe Israel off the map and who deny the Holocaust ever happened, because that’s what you said. So if you think you reaction is rational, I say you’re an idiot.

  • michael Burd says:

    Reality take a chill pill you are the one get all worked up.

    Nobody said it was easy trying to defend 5th column Jews…

  • Reality Check says:

    I guess Mr. Burd that you’re so used to being worked up and hysterical about reds under your bed etc. you take all this in your stride.

  • Michael Burd says:

    No reality the new reds are the self hating Jews and the Palestinian / Islamist useful idiots !!

    Burdy

  • Reality Check says:

    So you reckon that if I look under my bed I’ll find me.

  • Shirlee. says:

    @RC

    With a bit of luck no

  • Otto Waldmann says:

    Sooner or later on all topics, by opinion 115, things get well out of hand.
    Lets look at some centrifugal flights of fancy:

    – Gil wants a change of political direction within the Jewish communal leadership. Why !! Are we launching a new winter shmate range and polyester is not longer in fashion !!??
    – David is also on the boredom side and needs an invigorating new colour pallette ( I am writing from Perpignon in France so French words are ok !! ).The only smal diffrence is that he wants changes from within.
    So what is now deemed dessuette ( out of fashion Fr. ):
    Zionism
    Advocating for Israels official policies
    Supporting heroic Jews who have abandoned the comforts marked between Double Bay and Watsons Bay ( for NSW alone ) in favour of making that essential Jewish statement that we are no longer the free for all pillar to post anti Semitic pastime in OUR G-d given landand live at the mercy of the friendly Arab neighbours.
    Having the intellectual resources to man the baricades of dignity as a people entitled to go through history from now on – at last – without the constant fear of extermination.

    Our leadership needs to maintain with wisdom the tested necessary beliefs that have kept our people alive for thousands of years and NOT succumb to fanciful, egotistic half-baked notions of destructive nature.

    Gil, Mandy and ther rest of energetic “reformers”, learn FIRST what being a defender of a nation is before you want personal ambitions imposed on us.

  • Shirlee. says:

    Otto

    What on earth are you talking about?

  • TheSadducee says:

    There are so many better ways to handle this –

    i.e. if (as the JCCV assert) the majority of Vic Jews find the idea repugnant etc then why not state publicly that the AJDS have put forward their position, the JCCV does not agree with it (for whatever reasons – none of them have really been articulated clearly) and let the public make their own choices (which would seem, from the rhetoric to favour the JCCV’s pov)?

    Why such a drastic reaction like ostracising them? Do the JCCV not even want to put the issue to the consumer test? Why not?

    Whole issue seems poorly thought out and almost hysterical in overraction.

  • michael Burd says:

    Very Clever Sadduce as you very well know the mainstream Jews which you agree mostly agree with the majority of Jewish leadership find the AJDS views abhorrent . This silent majority are the most non participatory when it comes activism , advocacy and taking any part in these type of debates.
    In contrast the left which includes the anti- Zionist Jews and Palestinian, Arab , Muslim apologists are the most active and have the loudest voices so obviously there extremist fringe views would get the results you want.

    I put it to you the same question I have been asking the Israel bashers and have still not answered.

    ‘Why do you think the JCCV equivalent the ICV does not have any , extremist activist Anti- Palestinian pro- Zionist fringe groups affiliated with the Muslim Community ?

    Could this have something to do why the Palestinian narrative in the Israel/ Palestinian, Arab, Muslim conflict is the only one in town ?

  • TheSadducee says:

    Michael

    I would suggest that the Muslim Community (whatever you mean by that btw) is far unhealthier than the Jewish community generally and does not reflect a healthy diversity of viewpoints and thought.

    Do you want the Jewish community to be similarly unhealthy?

  • Reality Check says:

    Doesn’t it then follow, Mr Burd, that mainsteam Jews, who ever they may be, don’t really give a damn. Or it’s only you and a couple of other right wing mishigans who are the mainstream. I considered myself mainstream until you or Gil said I am a self-hating Jew, and I am still looking for myself under the bed.

  • Gil Solomon says:

    Hi Michael,

    This topic is already up to 156 comments and this lot will keep it going past 256 in no time. Round and round they go, ad nauseam.

    I think it is time for you to shown some benign neglect and not respond to this bunch, at least not for a while.

    It seems to me that many of them get a feeling of importance in seeing their comments posted and being actually indulged with a reply. For you to try to educate many of them is obviously an exercise in futility, as they are not remotely interested in what you have to say. They are just interested in their next post. Typical dialogue of the deaf.

    I would draw a line in the sand, back off for a while and let them babble on to each other.

    Best regards

  • michael Burd says:

    Your right Gill , I am off overseas tomorrow anyway good time to leave these SHJ’s alone , in any case I am bored with them..
    Time to move on…

    Cheers.

  • TheSadducee says:

    michael & gil

    I would suggest the self-haters are those who suggest that Jews be more like non-Jewish communities!

    I think I read about you guys in Lewis Carroll’s Through the Looking Glass…

  • Reality Check says:

    Every Jewish person I have spoken to in the last several months, including my grandmother, is a SHJ. Looks like there are far more SHJs than there are self-loving Jews like Burd and Solomon.

  • Reality Check says:

    And Im sure glad that Im not one of those.

  • TheSadducee says:

    Reality Check

    Just about every Jew I know is glad that they aren’t like them.

  • Reality Check says:

    Looks like there’s just you and me Sud left: does that mean we won?

  • Levi (a refugee from the USSR) says:

    So JCCV has recieved flak from some here for not upholding it’s own stated policy of pluralsim and accepting the diversity of views & opinions in the community by disaffiliating with the AJDC. I would argue the opposite – disaffiliating from the AJDC is totally in line with its policy. There is no place for an organisation like the AJDC, that advocates a racist & nazi style boycott against an entire group of people. Asbsolutely none.

    And for AJDC members and supporters to cry foul & complain that the JCCV is not upholding its principles & values – how twisted can you get? What incredible chutzpah (you actually give the word “chuztpah” a whole new meaning).

  • TheSadducee says:

    Levi

    The AJDC haven’t advocated a boycott against an entire group of people – they have advocated a boycott against products created over the pre-1967 Green Line between Israel and Jordan i.e. outside of Israel proper i.e. in the West Bank.

    This is distinctly different from the position of the broader BDS movement which includes Israel and is truly reprehensible in intent and motivation.

    As I stated before – if the JCCV believes that the majority of Vic Jews are opposed to the idea then they would articulate their opposition clearly and let the community take appropriate action.

    Threatening to ostracise this group with unproven blanket statements about community views etc strikes me as reactionary and short-sighted.

    Have we got to the stage where the cliche about 2 Jews, 3 opinions is now to be defined as 2 Jews, 1 opinion?

  • Levi (a refugee from the USSR) says:

    The Seducee, I regret to inform you that Jews living over the so called “green line” are people. Boycotting them and their products based on their ethnicity is racist and so are attempts to make Israel Judenrein…to say the least. The AJDC policy is racist. In line with the JCCV policy of diversity and pluralism, there is no room for racist organisations like the AJDC.

  • TheSadducee says:

    Levi

    The AJDC is not calling for a boycott of the settlers – merely their products. This is because they see this as a non-violent response to an social injustice i.e. the occupation of the West Bank and hope that economic impacts will influence them to adjust their policies/behaviours.

    The limited boycott policy is not racist and to suggest that it is absurd. They also do not seek to remove all Jews from Israel – another even more absurd proposition.

    (Incidentally, it is bizarre and offensive that you use a Nazi terminology which has a specific meaning and context and is totally innappropriate in this situation.)

    Honestly speaking, I’m sure that there are JCCV affiliates that could reasonably argue for a boycott of products from Syria, Turkey or a whole host of other countries – I would support these as well and don’t think it would damage the credibility of any of the proponents.

    To be frank – the community doesn’t have 1 voice on this topic and to try to present it that way is disingenous and intellectually dishonest. Why not acknowledge the diversity (even if it is offensive) and carry on? Ostracism can’t be the right answer.

  • Gil Solomon says:

    Levi,

    As I said to Michael in my above post, I suggest you leave this lot to their own devices and treat them with benign neglect. Whatever you have in mind to say has been told time and time again but it’s useless, as they will always come back with some naive comment to keep the dialogue going.

    Who knows, they could very well in fact be members of the AJDS.

    They claim to be Jews in order to give credibility to their views but you wouldn’t know one way or another with this lot as some of their comments are so naive and show not an ounce of depth let alone a historical perspective. As far as I know they could be adolescent Yobbos sitting in a pub with a laptop.

    Could there be anything more juvenile than the comment from Reality Check, whoever he or she is, who posted: “Looks like there’s just you and me Sud left: does that mean we won?”

    I suggest (for the last time) to anyone bothering to read this that you not indulge this lot any further and let them babble on back and forth to each other.

  • Reality Check says:

    But the reality is that the whole world sees the land over the “greenline” as being occupied. There also are more than 2 million Palestinians living there under Israeli occuption, which you seem to ignore, who don’t even have voting rights etc. For how long do you reckon this situation can go on for? No one is suggesting, except you, maybe, that the Jews living on the other side of the greenline are anything but Jewish. So while the AJDS mob want to boycott goods from the settlements they are not advocating the boycott of goods from Israel, so how is that racist, Nazi like behaviour, unless you think the people in the settlements are from another race. And Nazi like behaviour, really? I boycotted South African stuff during the Apartheid. I also boycott stuff from racist countries (but I go out of my way to Buy Israeli goods), does that make me behave like a Nazi? The Nazis did a lot worst than boycott Jews, you know.

  • Levi (a refugee from the USSR) says:

    “The AJDC is not calling for a boycott of the settlers – merely their products.”

    Explain the difference (with a straight face).

    “This is because they see this as a non-violent response”

    coupled with the violent tactics of the Arabs.

    “They also do not seek to remove all Jews from Israel”

    The leaders of the world wide BDS movement do not recognise Israel and call for its destruction. Whatever the intentions of the ADJC is – by supporting BDS (even a limited boycott) is helping to fan the flames.

    “an social injustice i.e. the occupation of the West Bank”

    The Balfour declaration, the San Remo conference (i.e. binding international law & sacred treaties) & the fact that the geneva convention is not applicable to Judea & Samaria demonstrates that to apply the term “occupation” to this situation is false and misleading at best. I dare you to prove otherwise…with facts.

    “(Incidentally, it is bizarre and offensive that you use a Nazi terminology which has a specific meaning and context and is totally innappropriate in this situation.)”

    Oh its totally appropriate, accurate and not the least bit offensive. The Nazis also boycotted “products” and “businesses” etc. If anyone is bizzare & offensive it is the people advocating todaty boycott.

    “I’m sure that there are JCCV affiliates that could reasonably argue for a boycott of products from Syria, Turkey or a whole host of other countries – I would support these as well and don’t think it would damage the credibility of any of the proponents.”

    All hypotheticals based on “blah”, “blah,” “blah.” The reality is, no one is boycotting products from Syria, Turkey etc – which makes this boycott all the more racist and offensive.

  • Levi (a refugee from the USSR) says:

    “But the reality is that the whole world sees the land over the “greenline” as being occupied”

    This is the same “world” that appoints Qaddaf’s Libya and Assad’s Syria to chair the UN human rights commission & Iran to oversee women’s rights around the world. Abba Eban once said that if the UN general assembly got together to make a resolution stating that the world was flat and Israel flattened it, the resolution would pass with only a few absenstations. Just because there are 52 muslim countries who vote as 1 block against Israel and bribe/black mail the rest of the world, does not mean that they have a right to set the reality on the ground. The reality is that the Balfour decleration & the San Remo conference give Jews the exclusive sole right to national self determination in areas beyond the so called “green line.” The reality is, the geneva convention is not applicable to these areas…or its just as applicable to the claim that the world is flat and Israel flattened it.

    “Nazi like behaviour, unless you think the people in the settlements are from another race. And Nazi like behaviour, really?”

    Trying to make an area Judenrein is Nazi like behaviour.

  • Reality Check says:

    Gil, you are getting personal here, insulting my intellegence. I’ll have you know that as a child I had terrible learning difficulties, but I overcame them to earn myself a doctrate in physics, except I only use that in my field, not like some people who call themselves doctor, when they’re only a dentist, to gain more credibility. So lets just argue on the facts and realities, and keep your paranoid views and insults to yourself, if you don’t mind.

  • Reality Check says:

    Levi, do you think that the settlers will be happy living under Palestinian rule? Because if we follow through with your reasoning, or lack of, and the Palestinians accept the settlers, as long as the land they occupy is incorperated into Palestine, will the Jewsih settlers be happy then?

  • Reality Check says:

    And what do you call turfing out the Palestinians from most of East Jerusalem, not Palestinianrein?

  • Levi (a refugee from the ussr) says:

    Reality, as per the balfour declaration and san remo conference (i.e. binding international law that cannot be overturned) this land should be under jewish sovereignty. The fact that israel regained the territory from jordan in a defensive war adds to that. I’m a little lost on your last comment about “turfing” out arabs from east jerusalem. Sounds like your clutching at straws.

  • Reallity Check says:

    Why am I wasting my time reading your nonsense Levi when I could be doing something far more important like watching some rubbish on TV.

  • Levi (a refugee from the ussr) says:

    well while we’re on the topic of getting personal, “Reality,” perhaps you should try sticking to physics and finding out why your logic and reasoning defies gravity…or dare i say reality. never let the facts get in the way of your argument and “reality.”Cheerie O :)

  • Shirlee. says:

    “But the reality is that the whole world sees the land over the “greenline” as being occupied”

    The whole world can say what it likes, but it needs to check out International Law before “seeing” it

    The valid International Law is that land acquired in a defensive war may be kept by the victim of aggression.

  • Reality Check says:

    Yeah right Shirlee, lets make Israel the ghetto state and live in total oblivion to the rest of the world. Good stuff Shirlee, that will teach them.

  • TheSadducee says:

    Shirlee

    Can you point out where you have obtained a legal opinion concerning the “occupation”?

    I put my faith in the ICJ advisory opinion from 2004 – what are you referring to?

  • TheSadducee says:

    Levi

    Can you elaborate further on this statement?

    “the fact that the geneva convention is not applicable to Judea & Samaria”

    I’m fascinated to see where you have derived this “fact” from…

  • Shirlee. says:

    TheSadducee, I will respond to. As to Reality Check, who is in desperate need of one, I will not answer.

    Why people have this need to be insulting is beyond me and I for one will not answer if addressed in such a manner.

    This is one of many links I have
    http://www.mythsandfacts.org/article_print.asp?ArtID=115

    This should be of interest to you also

    http://www.mythsandfacts.org/ReplyOnlineEdition/chapter-5.html

  • Levi (a refugee from the USSR) says:

    In addition to self defence here is another reason why the 4th geneva convetion does not apply –

    “Occupied Territory”

    The term “occupied territory,” which appears in the Fourth Geneva Convention, originated as a result of the Nazi occupation of Europe. Though it has become common parlance to describe the West Bank and Gaza as “occupied territories,” there is no legal basis for using this term in connection to the Arab-Israeli conflict.

    Professor Julius Stone, a leading authority on the Law of Nations, categorically rejected the use of the term “occupied territory” to describe the territories controlled by Israel on the following counts:

    (1) Article 49 relates to the invasion of sovereign states and is inapplicable because the West Bank did not and does not belong to any other state.

    (2) The drafting history of Article 49 [Protection of Civilian Persons in Time of War] – that is, preventing “genocidal objectives” must be taken into account. Those conditions do not exist in Israel’s case.

    (3) Settlement of Jews in the West Bank is voluntary and does not displace local inhabitants. Moreover, Stone asserted: that “no serious dilution (much less extinction) of native populations” [exists]; rather “a dramatic improvement in the economic situation of the [local Palestinian] inhabitants since 1967 [has occurred].”

  • TheSadducee says:

    Levi & Shirlee

    Thanks for the info – I’ll go and have a look and consider the points of view provided.

  • Sam says:

    Reality Check

    Anyone who has achieved a Ph.D. in Physics as you claimed above, would know even in their sleep and with their hands tied behind their back, that this degree is not termed or spelled as DOCTRATE.
    I suggest you check Google Dictionary to discover the proper spelling.
    All you other arguments re the AJDS are pathetic as well, and have been thoroughly discredited on this forum.

  • Reallity Check says:

    Sam, How can I possibly dispute your convincing argument. I typed that comment on the iPad so blame the auto spell on the machine, but why would you want to spell physics with a capital P, when it’s not a proper noun?

  • Shirlee. says:

    OK guys.. shoyn genig.(Enough already)

    Try being civil please.

    And we wonder why there is no peace in the world.

  • Otto Waldmann says:

    Sirlee

    re my opinion on the necessity for changes in ECAJ policies, I must confess that, on that score I am ” all the way with Ee Cee Ay Jay “.

    Re: opnions on occupation of the West bank – aka Judea and Samaria -, analogies with any conflicts post WWII, particularly the nazi type are highly offensive to the decency of the study of history, to say the least.
    If looking only at the nature of the conflict, what caused it and what followed, it becomes obvious that the very nature of the multitude of enemies of Israel and the eventual singular complexities of the advent of the “Palestinian problem ” created the necessity for genuinly NEW types of military and administrative solutions.
    The notion of occupation ignores the well known fact ( one would assume after al these years ) that the acute character of hostility, turned open terrorism by the newly created palestinian entity has been calling for measures which time and reason are yet to deal with.
    Today’s recognised “Palestinian” people owe their very identity to the separation of Judea and Samaria from Jordan. The separation has been achieved by Israel, yet, the continuous adversity by he inhabitants of these old Jewish lands against Israel has been forcing Israel to introduce and maintain measures of control which are meant to maintain security to the well intended targets of the Palestinians, i.e, the Jews of Israel.

    These are incredibly well known facts. Yet the propaganda machine monitored by the same enemies of Israel, the large contingent of Arab states and the palestinians themselves, have managed to create a new geopolitical cathegory, called, the “OCCUPATION” of …Palestine, some-thing which did NOT EXIST at the time of the conclusion of the Six Day war.
    What is added to the unethical development of blackmail and opression of the Jewish State is the farcical pseudo argumentation for “justice” promoted by certain Jews who need to be reminded the “banalities” of the ME conflict, as described above.
    Briefly, the new enemy of Israel, the Palestinians have created quite skilfully this SIXTH column ( wrongly termed by Michael as the “fifth Communists …” ) of support within the Jewish community. Every now and again,and again, un-nmaed characters such as ” Dr.Reality” and some “Saducee” remind us that a PhD in Physics cannot provide a shield against the vicious – and seeemingly effective in some cases – campaign in recruiting less than doct enthusiasts into their propaganda camp.

  • Reality Check says:

    Not that long ago the PLO president Mr Abbass said on Israeli TV that not accepting the UN partition plan of 1947 was a big mistake. Israel of course accepted and rejoices that after two thousand years we Jews finally had a piece of land that we could call our own. What I am curious about is do people who call the West Bank Judea and Samaria think it was a mistake for for the Arab states and Palestinians to have rejected the partition plan, or did they get it right by rejecting it? Remember, if they accepted the plan, then Israel wouldn’t have had Jerulasem nor the West Bank, but there would be peace and thousands upon thousands of Jewish and Arab lives would have been spared.

    So was the rejection of the plan by the Arabs a good thing or a bad thing?

  • Gil Solomon says:

    To Otto and Shirlee,

    Definitely for the last time please stop indulging this lot with studied replies. They are making fools of you both by keeping this dialogue going ad nauseam, next question after next question, next comment after next comment and you keep this nonsense going by giving reply after reply. They must be laughing their heads off.

    They have no intention of absorbing anything you have to say as they are an indoctrinated bunch, only interested in what they can say in their next post and being thrilled that someone even bothers to acknowledge whatever it is they babble on about.

    Maybe they are Jews (anti-semitic or otherwise), non Jews, leftists, members of AJDS or some just plain intellectual pygmies, who knows? On the other hand they may be very smart by keeping you two both going and engaged in spite of one ridiculous comment after the other.

    To prove the point this topic was over the 150 comment mark when I first wrote to Michael on April 8 and subsequently to Levi. Now it is at 189! And what has been gained, absolutely nothing.

    It is the dialogue of the deaf.

  • Reality Check says:

    Looks like we have got you going too Mr Solomon. But since I am such a left-wing, self-hating intellectually challanged Jew, could I implore you to answer my question. For an intellectual giant like yourself, it should be a cinch

  • Reality Check says:

    Or are you not as clever as you think, and you can’t.

  • Shirlee. says:

    RC, please tell me why you feel the need to be constantly rude to people?

  • Reality Check says:

    Me rude to people Shirlee? What about your mate Gilly, calling me an intellectual pigmy (I don’t know what he’s got against pigmies), self-hateing Jew, and worst of all a lefty. I’ll let you know that I cried when I heard of the passing of Baroness Thatcher. Rude when Otto, Burdy, Levi the asylum seeker from the USSR and Sam too, base their entire arguments by calling me stupid. Me rude, indeed!

  • Reality Check says:

    But Shirlee, since you too call the West Bank Judea and Samaria, maybe you can answer my question about whether the Arabs made a mistake by rejecting the 1947 UN Partition Plan? I know it’s a hypothetical question because I also know that the Arabs wanted to drive the Jews into the sea, and many still do now, but it’s not a rhetoric one. So please think it through and let me know.

  • Shirlee. says:

    Let’s take this one step at a time please.

    Yes I agree Gil was very rude to you and yes, I thought it unacceptable. Rudeness achieves nothing and I regret that I too at times resort to it when confronted with it.!! For which apologise, it is not my norm.

    Let’s try to be civil and yes, you too were rude. Let’s get past it.

    Now to your question regarding whether or not the Arabs made a mistake by rejecting the 1947 UN Partition Plan.

    That’s a tough one. There are points for and against on all fronts.

    I don’t think we should have ever accepted a Jewish State without Judea,Samaria and Jerusalem. Though I see why we did. We were desperate for our country to be returned to us and so accepted something which should have never been. We believed that Jerusalem would be kept as a sacred city and an open one. Big mistake.

    If the Arabs had accepted the Partition plan in 1948 we could have seen peace and prosperity for all concerned. We wouldn’t have had so much loss of life and so much hardship.My family in Israel tell me it has been a very long struggle living there. My father had a brother, who he never knew, who was killed in an Arab uprising in Tel Aviv, in 1922. He was 19 years old.

    Most Arabs still want to drive the Jews into the sea and do still claim that Israel is the fictitious country of Palestine. Abbas had a monument removed from Bethlehem showing Israel as Palestine for Obama’s visit. Last year I bought a map of ‘Palestine’ openly for sale in the Old City.

    I see Judea, Samaria and Jerusalem being ours and that’s where it should remain. I am of the school of thought that Jordan is Palestine, as was originally mandated and would have been, had the British not reneged on that promise.

    We were wrong accepting so readily the name change, by Jordan, of Judea and Samaria, to the West Bank of Jordan.We were very wrong (not me because I have never done so)accepting the name change of the Palestinian Arabs to Palestinians in 1967 so readily as it is now being used as a very successful propaganda tool..

  • Reality Check says:

    Thanks for your response Shirlee. But it’s a hypothetical question, and therefore you just need to think what is more important: Having a Jewish state, without its borders fitting Biblical times where Jews and Arabs live side by side in peace, or having to have gone through all the strife, heartbreak and bloodshed so that, by default, because of the threat of extinction, Israel encompasses Biblical territories, which it now calls theirs, according to a unagreeded agreement, between just the Jews?

  • Shirlee. says:

    I can’t answer. I know what I would like but that will never be. Like there will never be peace in Israel because that isn’t want the Arab leadership want.

    I’m sure the people do but they have no say in the matter.

    All I know is that when went into Judea and SA maria I felt I was home and that’s the way it should stay

  • Joe in Australia says:

    Reality Check: why would you possibly think that a state where Arabs and Jews live in peace was an option? No such states exist today; and the Jewish minorities in Arab states were either killed or, their life becoming impossible, fled their homes and migrated to Israel or elsewhere. If the Arabs had accepted partition then Israel would still be at war with them; it would just have started from an even more disadvantageous position.

  • Reallity Check says:

    Joe, it’s hypothetical question. Never mind!

  • geoffff says:

    I’ll answer the hypothetical even though it’s a little asinine and presumptuous from this time and place.

    Of course the Arabs made a mistake in rejecting the 1947 UN partition plan. Are you daft?

  • Shirlee. says:

    Guys, it’s not what he is asking.

    The first option would be the best but “it ain’t gonna” happen

    I like Naftali Bennet’s option

  • Otto Waldmann says:

    Gil

    you are right, of course, those arguing in favour of palestinian rights and implicit Israeli opresssion reduce the topic to their misconceived theories. As the persons involved, whether real names or otherwise, are irrelevant to the course of the dialectics, exchanges would be necessary only to constantly address the irrational as a genuine public affairs exercise. Your observation of the obvious redundance and absurdity of the opposite camp, associated with the balanced intellectual observation that those determined to continue with their mantra regardless of the arguments against them cannot be convinced to change their opinions, is just as valid as the ….continuation of the arguments against them. We both make sense and that is precisely what rattles those unable to do the same.

  • geoffff says:

    So what is the hypothetical question if that’s not it?

    I’m happy to play. But I’m not going to frame the question for RC.

  • Shirlee. says:

    Geoff I know what he is getting at, but it’s impossible to answer. I told you what I favour.

  • letters in the age says:

    Johnny,

    Identity is complex which is why a sociologist is required to write an entry on this blog

    Cmon Galus!!

    Im still waiting….

  • geoffff says:

    He still needs to frame the question for himself Shirlee. The process might help him and those who think like him to think this all the way through and therefore clear the thinking.

  • Reallity Check says:

    Now Geofffff, that wasn’t too hard, was it. You answered my question; the Arabs rejecting the 1947 UN partition plan was bad. Therefore it follows that all the people who reckon the West Bank, or as they call it Judea and Samaria, is part of Israel would have had have a problem in reclaiming that land if the Arabs accepted the plan. So now that Israel has Jerusalem and the West Bank, which you and your friends is right and just and how it should be, how can you say it was bad? Geoff, if you care to respond, please give some reasonable argument, rather than resort to your silly and nonsensital insults as you can only do.

  • Otto Waldmann says:

    Reality
    ubersensitive, maybe you should cut down on the ..red lollies – the ones you store under the bed – as they seem to exacerbate your ideological condition. If you indulge in absurdities, as some see, it is only normal and DECENT that those “some” who see them brand them as such. Here’s one:

    In the year of grace 2013 we have been already through:

    -1918
    -1939-45
    -1948
    -1967

    yet, in your conclusive remarks, 1967 is nowhere to be seen.
    Let us refresh your memeory, or simply just implant that decisive watershed.
    Even if the Arabs would have accepted the partition in 1948 they would have intended and started war against the Jewish State in 1967, as ALL neighbouring and not so Arab states did WITHOUT EXCEPTION. This “hypotetical” has realistic, tangible elements which deem the hypotetical nature less so, if at all.
    This simply means that you are dwelling on insuficient evidence, you are deliberatley ignoring essential FACTS, you arrive, once again , at absurd conclusions , yet you demand intellectual respect.Starting with your “name”, what sort of reality are you really, really trying to hoist on us?!
    And one more thing, I never called you stupid, others have and most definitely I did NOT call them stupid either, so there…..

  • geoffff says:

    Your question was whether it was a mistake for the Arabs to reject the partition plan. Of course it was. Just as it was a mistake for the Arabs to reject all other offers of land for peace. Just as the continuing rejectionism is a mistake.

    Is your question was it a mistake for Israel to accept the plans because had the Arabs not rejected the plans the Arabs would have got Judea and Samaria in return for recognition and peace?

    And from that you are inferring that I should have been opposed to these and all other peace plans if they involved a dealing in Judea and Samaria?

    Seriously? Is that where you are heading with this?

    To call these lands Judea and Samaria is simply more accurate than “West Bank”. It does not follow that a negotiated settlement can never involve Judea and Samaria for the sake of peace. How many times do the Israelis have to tell you that?

    You can wishful think the rejectionism and intransigence away in a hypothetical dream if it makes you feel better but the Israelis do not have that luxury. It is there and it is not going away.

    The Arab Muslims will never accept a sovereign Jewish state with jurisdiction over what they see as Muslim land. Not unless there is a secularist counter revolution through Muslim lands like that of Ataturk’s ( now all but lost)

    The Israelis have to adapt to that reality. Evacuating those lands and especially Area C in the face of this violent rejectionism is not reality and doesn’t even make a good basis for a hypothetical. It’s insanity.

    It also involves a realistic exploration of other options. If the “Palestinians” and other Arab Muslims have said no and no forever, and no one is even asking them to change their minds, then why are you surprised that there are elements in the Israeli political spectrum that are pursing a vision that leaves out what the “Palestinians” do not want?

  • Shirlee. says:

    Please can we get this straight

    UN Resolution 181, adopted in 1947, referred to “Samaria and Judaea”, not the West Bank, as part of a proposed Arab State to be carved out of the Mandate of Palestine.

    After the 1948 Arab-Israeli War, Trans-Jordan, renamed Jordan in 1949, renamed the area on the west bank under its control following the cessation of hostilities the “West Bank” to distinguish it from the rest of the Kingdom, which falls on the River Jordan’s east bank.

    This area was captured from Jordan by Israel in the 1967 Six-Day War. The term “Judaea and Samaria” was officially adopted by the Israel in 1967 but it was not used extensively until 1977.

  • Doodie Ringelblum says:

    Forgive me for returning briefly to the topic of the thread.

    I note that yesterday there was a JCCV Council of Presidents meeting. This body does not replace the plenum of the JCCV but is a mechanism for raising and disseminating issues. I’ve spoken to three people who attended the meeting who confirm that neither the AJDS campaign nor any proposal to disaffiliate them was raised by the JCCV executive or any member body at that meeting and there was no foreshadowing that such a proposal would be brought to the plenum.

    I do note that the original post carries no byline and that no source for the quote by Nina Basset is given. It certainly doesn’t appear on the JCCV website as far as I can see.

    But at least we’ve been able to exchange ideas in a respectful manner and measured tone – so that’s all that really matters.

  • Shirlee. says:

    Nothing to forgive Doodie.

    I have it on good authority it will be raised on May 6th.

  • Reallity Check says:

    Geofffff, read my question again. You would have been awful to debate with at school: you just don’t get what hypothetical means

  • Mandi Katz says:

    Hi Doodie – I was similarly interested in the the context of Nina Bassat’s comments, and asked the eds in a post on 28 March where the JCCV statement was made.

    They replied that both statments were emailed to them from the respective organisations – the AJDS statement was sent first day pesach and the JCCV statement was sent two days later.

  • Joe in Australia says:

    Reallity Check: If everyone misunderstands what you’re saying it probably means you expressed yourself poorly. I still don’t understand what your point is.

  • geoffff says:

    I could not have predicted the future in 1948 had the partition plan been accepted by all parties any more than I can now. The same goes for all the other peace plans, accepted by Israel but rejected by the Palestinians, that would have led to another “Palestinian” state.

    All I know is that the Israelis were prepared to make the sacrifices and take the risks at the time and that is good enough for me.

  • Reallity Check says:

    Just forget it, obviously my expectations have been too high

  • Shirlee. says:

    Reallity Check …please!!!

    Nothing to do with expectations. The question, hypothetically or not, is unanswerable.

  • geoffff says:

    Here’s a hypothetical for you Reality Check.

    You have been transported to a parallel universe in search of job. You are able to do that because of a PhD in physics.

    On the parallel world where you end up there is an intractable conflict between a tiny state of a small nation and a vastly larger nation of bitterly contesting states that are united only in wanting to see the little nation destroyed. To that end they have launched war after war, created fictional sub-nations, continuously howl blood curdling threats that they do their best to carry out, defame and vilify the little nation and her people globally to a limit beyond which their is no further extreme, celebrate or deny genocide while promising another and have committed crimes so vile they had no name. This huge war like nation are known as the “Jews”. The little nation are the “Palestinians”.

    The Palestinians can trace their origins in the land to earliest recorded history but that means nothing at all to their enemies. In one of the wars of extermination averted and seen off by the Palestinians they took some land that is part of the ancient homeland but have repeatedly and passionately offered to give for yet another state in return for peace and recognition. This has always been viciously rejected or cynically exploited in hoaxes.

    You find yourself in a community of Palestinian diaspora who naturally are strongly committed to the little peaceful state with which they have strong connections of all types. Among this community, a little group emerges that calls for the abandonment of all or most of the buffer in exchange for nothing. Just give up and hope for the best. They believe this so strongly they have just launched a campaign to boycott the produce of the people who live there blaming them for the no peace. Some go even further and call for the Palestinians to abandon their state and acquiesce in the absorption into those who hate them.

    And now the hypothetical. Do you seriously think that the AJDS has any business in the JCCV that should be allowed one moment longer than necessary? Or are expectations that you might be able to think this thing through far too high?

    Perhaps not. I gather from the comments here no one had such expectations.

  • Reality Check says:

    Geofffff, you failed to connect the JCCV and AJDS into your hythetical story, but never mind, I know what you’re getting at. In your hypethetical the AJDS are the enemy of their own people. In the way you describe them, the AJDS although Palestinians want their own planet destroyed, and the JCCV are committed to this peaceful little planet and thus represent it’s supporters in the diaspora, here. In this case the AJDS has no place in the JCCV.

    Now back to my hyperthetical, After Mr. Abbas said that rejecting the 1947 UN partition plan was a mistake; what if then the Arab states accepted the partition in 1947. Was the rejection by the Arabs a good thing or a bad thing? That is, if Israel remained to this day, the size as shown in UN resolution 181, would that be a good thing or a bad thing?

  • geoffff says:

    “Geofffff, you failed to connect the JCCV and AJDS into your hythetical story, but never mind, …”

    I just thought you could do with a reality check, Reality Check.

    As for your hypothetical? I’m sure the Israelis could have coped with peace, recognition and full access to Jerusalem if that is what is within the framework of your hypothetical. The Israelis fought for it.

    And then the future? Would it have been good or bad? Would it have been worse than it was? Might it have heralded a glorious era of East West cooperation and mutual understanding? After all implicit in your hypothetical is the assumption that the al-Husseini forces and influence has been eliminated. Have they, in your hypothetical? Have all the forces of hate against the very idea of a Jewish state disappeared along with the implacable opposition to the partition plan? As one drove the other it would have to, in your hypothetical, would it not?

    That is why your hypothetical is an asinine fantasy. It includes an element that you have left undefined but is nevertheless its absence is pure fantasy. The one element that is the absolute constant of this conflict, the extreme and violent Arab/Muslim rejectionism to the existence of the Jewish state, then as now, you have not defined as part of your hypothetical.

    There is a reason for that and its one that all the left shares. If you defined your hypothetical to include the removal of Arab/Muslim violent rejectionism and its replacement with acceptance and tolerance of the Jewish state then what I can say? Is this a good thing? In 1947, 1967 or any year from then until now? Is that your question?

    How can I answer it? Duh? Remove the problem and you no longer have the problem. Do you really need a doctorate to work that out?

    Now back to my hypothetical and if it helps to focus the problem for you do not concern yourself with the reality check at the end. That is a world in which you are clearly uncomfortable.

    The roof body is named the Palestinian Community Council and the problematic little group who are attacking Palestine and urging boycotts and idiotic concessions while ignoring “Israelite” intransigence is the Palestinian Democratic Society.

    Does that help at all Reality Check? I doubt it. My guess is that reality is the one thing you are absolutely determine to avoid at all costs. The modern far left is like that. Always has been come to think of it.

  • Reallity Check says:

    Shirlee, see the rubbish I have to put up with: name calling, etc. all because Geoffff has a problem getting his mind around the concept of hypothetical. My 10 year old grandson has a better understanding.

  • geoffff says:

    Name calling? Moi?

    Mate, it’s you who named himself “Reality Check”.

    You don’t think you’re being a little over-sensitive here?

    Come on RC. I’ve answered your hypothetical fully and at length. Now how about mine?

  • geoffff says:

    Just to be clear in my hypothetical reply, I said

    ” The Israelis fought for it”. when I should have said “The Israelis fought it after all” as reason why acceptance of the partition plan by Arab Muslims would have been “good”.

    But that is because acceptance of the partition plan pre supposes the in good faith removal of Arab/Muslim extremist hostility and intransigence and a new era of permanent acceptance of the Jewish state. Without that they could never have accepted the partition plan.

    Then as now.

  • Reallity Check says:

    Geoffff, give it a rest.

  • Otto Waldmann says:

    Reality

    you just did in la memme fashion, nothing said…………

    Burdy

    the Korean analyssis is flagrantly fraught with errors of the political science diletantism kind.
    Apologies for continuing a thread so distant from the main topic(s) here, but , if stareted it calls for corrections.
    Kim Il Sung or Kim Ir Sen, was a real national war hero in the annals of its people. During my childhood in Romania, after 1953 , I met a fairly large contingent of North Korean war orphans “adopted” by the Romanian communist regime. All other comunist countries did the same.
    Their passion for Kim Ir Sen could not be matched by any type of fanaticism. I even remember a song IN KOREAN abt this. Paul Robson also reccorded a transcription of a famous Negro spiritual on a Korean communist theme, swithcing names from a black hero to a Korean orphan called Wu Wing and so on.
    Kim Ir Sen’s son did not match his father’s fame albeit the leadership line beig secured. He was no hero of any kind. Now the newest addition in the artificial dynastic line has even less of the profile carved in the Korean psyche by the ab originae dictator. The most important factor is, however, the EXPECTED Communist Party leadership intercine competition for power. A heavily militarised leadership which has Kim family members and old yet not so ossified cliques of leadership contenders, some regarding the latest Kim version as unworthy, un upstart.
    This is the main reason for the leadership assertion of the current hyperfed Kim latest version. If he can oppose the imperialist clique with a show of force – which does not need be used as such !!!- , then his position is safer for the foreseeable future.
    As such, any analogy with Israel is so outlandish, I’d call it absurd.

  • Doodie Ringelblum says:

    The JCCV met tonight. There was no motion to disaffliate the AJDS.

    The JCCV had requested and received an undertaking by the AJDS not to use the JCCV logo in any pronouncements and not to purport to speak on behalf of the entire community or represent that its affiliation with the JCCV meant that it had its imprimatur.

    Sam Tatarka of the State Zionist Council then moved a lengthy motion which was vigorously debated and subsequently passed by a significant majority. In essence the motion dissociates the JCCV from the policy of BDS and deplores the policy of the AJDS.

    The point was made by several speakers in favour of the motion that the motion did not seek to censure the AJDS – only to condemn the AJDS policy on BDS.

  • Otto Waldmann says:

    GUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUTSY JCCV !!!
    Let’s debate if debating core Zionist values is worth debating, at least in Victoria.
    I, for one, rest my case.
    ( Until further notice, right now busy throwing up )

  • Shirlee says:

    Now let’s invite Australians for Palestine and Independent Australian Jewish Voices to join and we have a trio.

    I daren’t say what I am thinking apart from the fact we are our own worst enemy.

  • geoffff says:

    Why not affiliate the Loewenstein/Slezak group? Why not “Jews Against The Occupation” or “Jews for Gaza” or whatever? At some point Jews will have to come to terms with the phenomenon of Jewish antisemitism.

    At the very least did they manage to flush out a straight word from AJDS on exactly what they stand for?

    Are they for a two state solution which everyone accepts involves a measure of ethnic cleansing anyway but as it’s only Jews and they’re used to it doesn’t count? But in the case of AJDS demand the ethnic cleansing be done upfront, unilaterally and with apologies?

    Or are they for the “binational” state which we must know is an euphemism for genocide?

    What do they want? I think we have a need to know.

  • Shirlee says:

    I am angry beyond words with this vote at the JCCV.

    I’m fuming. When I think of all I did for months on end exhausting myself, from the Marrickville Council ‘stunt’, to the Max Brenner protests in Parramatta and Newtown to oppose the BDS and now we have our very own Jewish BDS group as an accepted part of the Victorian Jewish Community.

    Surely we will be the laughing stock of World Jewry.
    It’s one thing to have freedom of speech but quite another to allow this.

    The AJDS have in effect joined with Australians for Palestine by having posts by Samah Sabawi on their Facebook page, by extension the JCCV have accepted them as an affiliate

Leave a comment!

You must be logged in to post a comment.