Israel-Gaza War (and Iranian Distractions)

[Syne]

Again, completely ignoring the BBC providing cover for Hezbollah and Hamas by repeatedly deflecting back on Israel... or anything else possible. I see you don't care about that. Figures.

[Syne]

[Image: 632797103_1428763315598133_5033763173926...e=6993ECFC]

[Syne]

[Image: qj6hVUP.jpg]

[C C]

David Remnick in The New Yorker described Haaretz as "easily the most liberal newspaper in Israel", its ideology as left-wing and its temper as "insistently oppositional".[30] According to Ira Sharkansky, Haaretz's op-ed pages are open to a variety of opinions.[44] J. J. Goldberg, the editor of the American The Jewish Daily Forward, describes Haaretz as "Israel's most vehemently anti-settlement daily paper".[45] Stephen Glain of The Nation described Haaretz as "Israel's liberal beacon", citing its editorials voicing opposition to the occupation, the discriminatory treatment of Arab citizens, and the mindset that led to the Second Lebanon War.[46] A 2003 study in The International Journal of Press/Politics concluded that Haaretz's reporting of the Israeli–Palestinian conflict was more favorable to Israelis than to Palestinians but less so than that of The New York Times.[47] In 2016, Jeffrey Goldberg, the editor-in-chief of The Atlantic, wrote: "I like a lot of the people at Haaretz, and many of its positions, but the cartoonish anti-Israelism and anti-Semitism can be grating."
- https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Haaretz#Ed...viewpoints

Less favorable to Israelis than the NYT, and even the Atlantic thinks Haaretz is "anti-Israelism and anti-Semitism."

Ironically, a (socialist) Labor Zionism newspaper in its earliest days, but over the decades since, almost all socialist organizations became anti-Israel (like the DSA in NYC), due to the postcolonial and decolonization movements that arose in Marxist theory in the ensuing decades of the 20th-century. The universal ambitions of the ideology are more important to Jewish members than their ethnic roots or allegiance. Haaretz itself, of course, shifted more to a mainstream left-wing or progressive stance during that period. But accordingly, New Antisemitism can still be fashionable with it, as also with the NYT to a limited extent, etc.

[Syne]

I recently watched an interview with a historian who said that Jews had been so persecuted that some had sought refuge by trying to integrate with such secular ideologies, as a survival strategy. As such, the adopted secular ideology became more important to them than their own ethnicity or heritage.

[confused2]

I recently watched an interview with a historian who said that Jews had been so persecuted that some had sought refuge by trying to integrate with such secular ideologies, as a survival strategy. As such, the adopted secular ideology became more important to them than their own ethnicity or heritage.

On reflection I see this is a variation on the "No true Scotsman" argument https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/No_true_Scotsman
I prefer Yazata's more honest approach.
I'll leave my original response but see no reason to follow it down the rabbit hole.

Japaneses immigrants to the US faced this problem during WW2 (the US being at war with Japan).
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Internment..._Americans
[quote]
Internees were prohibited from taking more than they could carry into the camps, and many were forced to sell some or all of their property, including their homes and businesses. At the camps, which were surrounded by barbed wire fences and patrolled by armed guards, internees often lived in overcrowded barracks with minimal furnishing.
[@__@]
Japanese Americans were initially barred from U.S. military service, but by 1943, they were allowed to join, with 20,000 serving during the war.