Israyale: Triumph of the Spirit!

In a very highly recommended diary, Kossacks were proudly presented with two cartoons depicting the nefarious Jewish control of Yale University. But there's a historical precedent to one of the cartoons - a very troubling historical precedent.

A recent Diary Israyale argued that the vast Jewish conspiracy as preventing Dr. Juan Cole from being appointed to a position at Yale.  The diarist chose to commission cartoons that he feels sums up his case.

The first cartoon depicts Yale being renamed Israyale.  Very droll, a comic masterpiece.  The second cartoon, however, depicts a band of trench-coated Jews darkly threatening the very, very White Yale faculty member with the clever line "Juan Cole sleeps with the Gefilitte Fishes."

Lovely!

I was very offended by this cartoon - being Jewish, Israeli, and sick of how Israel is depicted (often, not always) on DailyKos I argued that the cartoon was anti-Semitic.  The reason why: I've seen this cartoon, this motif, in a different form before:

Hey, the hat has changed, but the message never does. Symbols matter, images matter. Political cartoons are a powerful medium. To say that we should view the Israyale cartoons solely in the context of the diary seems a willing neglect of reality - the cartoons are on the Web, now they've been picked up by other sites. The cartoons form their own message - a message of unintentional bigotry, but bigotry nontheless. Juan Cole is an accomplished scholar who stands on his own merit - this garbage does no dignity to the manner or his work.

The cartoons are an issue. We should discuss them.

•  Wow

  Sometimes we just don't know how to leave well enough alone, do we?

  by Jay Elias on Fri Jun 16, 2006 at 03:12:28 PM PDT

  •  I shouldn't leave it alone, Jay.

    GMT made it very clear that he was exceptionally proud of the cartoons.  As soon as I saw the second one I had a gut reaction - I'd seen a cartoon like that before.

    No matter how many times I - and others - tried to argue that the cartoon was anti-Semitic, it was ignored.

    Look at the cartoons, see the resemblance - that's the issue - people on DailyKos tolerate a degree of anti-Semitism that I find unacceptable.  It's fair to critique Israel, it's disgusting to slander an entire people.

    by barryannarbor on Fri Jun 16, 2006 at 03:47:54 PM PDT

    •  You remind me of my dad...

      Paranoid, seeing anti-semitism behind every comment. Because of that, he hates all Germans and all Arabs. He just assumes they're all anti-semites.

      Honestly, have you ever actually seen Der Ewige Jude or Jude Suss or read the Protocols of the Elders of Zion? If this is all it takes to offend you, I would suggest heading straight for the nearest Kibbutz and moving in permanently.

      by Arken on Fri Jun 16, 2006 at 03:57:09 PM PDT

      •  I've seen the film and read the book.

        And I don't want that filth to worm its way into the Progressive Movement.  We need to stop this garbage now, not let it become an acceptable part of DailyKos.

        by barryannarbor on Fri Jun 16, 2006 at 03:58:42 PM PDT

        •  Oh come on. This is ridiculous.

          Let me ask you... if this was about Italy and Italian-Americans and the cartoon instead had the gangster saying 'Juan Cole sleeps with the cippiono' would you have written this diary? Would you have been highly offended?

          Couldn't you just possibly be inventing prejudice where none was intended?

          by Arken on Fri Jun 16, 2006 at 04:06:10 PM PDT

          •  Italian Mobsters working for AIPAC?

            Hey, we hadn't thought of that!  Actually, that would have made a very confusing cartoon - what would the point have been?

            Tony Soprano - our stereotypical lobbyist?

            by barryannarbor on Fri Jun 16, 2006 at 04:08:48 PM PDT

            •  You evaded the question by confusing things.

              As I said, if this were about Italy and Italian-Americans rather than about Israel and Jewish Americans, would you have been equally offended?

              by Arken on Fri Jun 16, 2006 at 04:11:14 PM PDT

              •  Simply, yes.

                I would be offended.  If someone depicted Tony Soprano as working to advance - God forbid - the former Italian government, I'd be pissed off as hell.

                If someone depicted all Arabs as being suicide bombers, I'd be pissed off as hell.

                Rascist sterotypes have no place on DailyKos.

                by barryannarbor on Fri Jun 16, 2006 at 04:14:09 PM PDT

                •  Hmm... yet I didn't see you post a diary

                  about Tony snow's 'tar baby' comment... why is that?

                  by Arken on Fri Jun 16, 2006 at 04:15:14 PM PDT

                  •  You mean that idiot BushCo Press secretary?

                    Why pay attention to a jackal?  Jesus, he worked for Fox.

                    by barryannarbor on Fri Jun 16, 2006 at 04:16:20 PM PDT

                    •  Ah, so a cartoon with 'offensive' imagery

                      drawn by someone will most likely not get seen by very many people merits a diary more than the White House Press Secretary making an 'offensive' remark?

                      You have unusual priorities.

                      I guess to answer your question of, 'Why pay attention to a jackal?' using this logic the response is, 'we should be paying attention to nitpicking events of little to no significance which affect virtually no one.'

                      by Arken on Fri Jun 16, 2006 at 04:18:57 PM PDT

                      •  I think Kos is important.

                        Despite myself, I care about how issues progress on DailyKos.  I really do.  And this cartoon has already started showing up on the sites that delight in tearing DailyKos down.

                        We all know what Tony Snow is.  Let him dig a deeper hole for him and the rest of his corrupt administration.

                        by barryannarbor on Fri Jun 16, 2006 at 04:31:04 PM PDT

                        •  I fail to understand why

                          there is such dissent to, and dismissiveness of, your concerns.

                          You can be sure those concerns are shared by numerous Kossacks and they should, at least, receive a respectful hearing.

                          Were the cartoons anti-semitic?  Perhaps, but it's not an either/or, but rather something that falls on a continuum.

                          They approached anti-semitism, is what I would say, and therefore they must be addressed as such.

                          by Karmafish on Fri Jun 16, 2006 at 04:34:44 PM PDT

                          •  It's a limit! Weee.. Calcalus

                            by Pumpkinlove on Fri Jun 16, 2006 at 04:38:15 PM PDT

                          •  I don't think there is dissent to the concerns

                            I think they were amply addressed, in a diary that made the rec list and got 500+ comments.  And I think the argument gets weaker the more we dwell on it.

                            In addition, diaries calling out other diaries are bad form.

                            by Jay Elias on Fri Jun 16, 2006 at 04:41:29 PM PDT

                            •  That's not an unfair point.

                              I just hate to see what I take to be a fair concern dismissed too easily.

                              But, you're right, this was already dealt with.

                              by Karmafish on Fri Jun 16, 2006 at 04:46:30 PM PDT

                              •  I do to...

                                ...which is why I told GMT that although I wasn't personally concerned, that he ought to take other people's concern more seriously in his diary.

                                Anyway, I'm off, have a great night.

                                by Jay Elias on Fri Jun 16, 2006 at 04:50:23 PM PDT

                                •  Enjoy the concert!

                                  by Karmafish on Fri Jun 16, 2006 at 04:51:31 PM PDT

                    •  OMG!

                      Did I read this correctly? The BushCo press sec'y is a known bad guy so why pay attention to him? This from he who never stops telling us we should pay as much attention to the Palestinian failures as the Israeli?

                      Do you not see an ounce of irony in your statement?

                      by Opakapaka on Fri Jun 16, 2006 at 06:05:50 PM PDT

                      •  So - if one person says something...

                        If a person we all agree is an idiot says something, we should discount every other person who says the same thing?

                        Come on - you don't honestly think we should ignore what happens on the Palestinian side of this debate, do you?  

                        So, I have to keep asking this, what do you think of the cartoons?

                        by barryannarbor on Fri Jun 16, 2006 at 06:15:43 PM PDT

                        •  The point is

                          you don't pay attention to the Bush press sec'y because you know he's a bad guy. Why do you demand others give equal time to Hamas and Islamic Jihad (known relatively bad groups) as opposed to Israel, who according to our dear congress critters (and yourself) is as pure as the spring rain.

                          I love the cartoon. But I'm not Sicilian, nor Jewish, so I have no reason to take it personally; and I'm not generally insecure or easily-offended--especially by artwork of very high quality, commissioned specifically for dKos by GMT, who IMO is one of the top five posters on the site, and by artwork which IMO is very representative of the actual situation (reportedly Jewish donors getting Juan Cole nixed via back-handed monetary threats).

                          by Opakapaka on Fri Jun 16, 2006 at 06:39:10 PM PDT

                          •  Well, at least you're honest.

                            I've never said Israel was pure as the spring rain.  But I've found that many folks on DailyKos choose to ignore the actions of Hamas, Fatah, Islamic Jihad while pointing out with glee anything that Israel does wrong.

                            That you like the cartoons - well, all I can ask is that you take a close look at the one from Der Jude, and the one that your friend posted.  If you can't see the resemblance, or that you can't see the bigotry, then, at least spend some time thinking about what those cartoons say to the outside world about DailyKos.

                            by barryannarbor on Fri Jun 16, 2006 at 06:49:42 PM PDT

                            •  Listen to me!

                              ..."many folks on DailyKos choose to ignore the actions of Hamas, Fatah, Islamic Jihad"

                              is equivalent to

                              "Why pay attention to a jackal?  Jesus, he worked for Fox."

                              No?

                              by Opakapaka on Fri Jun 16, 2006 at 06:59:03 PM PDT

                            •  think of it this way

                              many folks on DailyKos choose to ignore the actions of Hamas, Fatah, Islamic Jihad while pointing out with glee anything that Israel does wrong.

                              The actions of terrorists are not ignored by DailyKos.  That is simply not true.  I do understand your point that there is a higher quantity of diaries about Israel than there are about Hamas or Fatah (Israel has had slightly more diaries written about it than Harriet Meyers has had written about her), but that does not mean that people are ignoring the acts of these groups.  

                              The reason why there is more debate about Israel is simple.  It is because there's actually something to debate about.  There are a substantial number of people in this community who are staunchly pro-Israel, sometimes to the point of trying to justify ALL acts of the Israeli government, no matter how blatantly destructive.  Many who criticize Israel's actions speak up to argue against such apologists.  These same critics equally deplore the violent acts of the groups you named, but there is nobody here defending those groups, so it is, as we say in the legal profession, "a moot point."

                              This lack of debate on a subject that 99.99999999... percent of us here know we all agree on is not an indication that some of us are unfairly harping on Israel.  It is only a reflection that when there's nobody arguing that terrorists are good, to go around pre-emptively spouting the obvious (that they're bad), is just a waste of time.  There's "no there there".

                              Does that make any sense?

                              by Balam on Sat Jun 17, 2006 at 04:00:12 PM PDT

                  •  The funny thing

                    about the "Tar Baby" comment. I saw it and I winced. But I don't actually think the comment was racist. Snow was not just tossing out a racial slur, he was referencing the Br'er Rabbit story about the tar baby (which is undoubtedly the source of the slur as well). The Br'er Rabbit stories occupy a complicated place in American racial consciousness. They are West African in origin but they come down to us via Joel Chandler Harris, a white Southerner whose own racist thinking creeps in at points. But Snow's reference was clearly to  wanting to avoid getting stuck.

                    That said, Snow's cluelessness in making this comment is arguably a testimony to his underlying racism.

                    On the subject of the cartoons, they seem anti-Semitic to me. In a low-key kind of way, but still. I don't know that it deserves a new thread (in fact I think it doesn't). But as an anti-Zionist I think its important to acknowledge when criticism of Israel does cross the line.

                    by Christopher Day on Fri Jun 16, 2006 at 05:52:23 PM PDT

        •  Furthermore- if you saw this on a car-

          

          Would it offend you? If so why and if not, why not?

          by Arken on Fri Jun 16, 2006 at 04:08:24 PM PDT

          •  I like the Darwin fish personally

            by Pumpkinlove on Fri Jun 16, 2006 at 04:18:25 PM PDT

            •  I have a Darwin fish on my car. I love it.

              I love that some fundamentalist christians get those 'Jesus fish eating a Darwin fish' emblems for their cars totally oblivious to the fact that an idea like that is evolution in action.

              by Arken on Fri Jun 16, 2006 at 04:20:07 PM PDT

          •  Does that mean the driver's Jewish?

            Is the fish insulting Christianity?  Actually, I've ordered a Flying Spaghetti Monster for my car.

            Are you saying that the Gefilitte Fish is equivalent to portraying shadowy Jews influencing affairs?

            by barryannarbor on Fri Jun 16, 2006 at 04:21:09 PM PDT

            •  You are being very intentionally obtuse

              and it's rude. I'm finished with this discussion.

              by Arken on Fri Jun 16, 2006 at 04:30:44 PM PDT

            •  where can you get

              the flying spaghetti monster?

              by Christopher Day on Fri Jun 16, 2006 at 05:54:21 PM PDT

              •  Try

                this link.

                by Opakapaka on Fri Jun 16, 2006 at 06:08:39 PM PDT

          •  I showed an ad for that

            to my mother-in-law a few months ago, and she laughed and said she wanted one.  She thought it would go over big at the JCS.  I exercised some . . . discretion . . . and didn't get her one, because there's probably some idiot out there somewhere with no sense of humor who would be offended . . .

            by Deward Hastings on Fri Jun 16, 2006 at 04:26:14 PM PDT

    •  if anything

      that cartoon plays upon ethnic depictions of sicilians, not jews.

      by wu ming on Fri Jun 16, 2006 at 04:21:54 PM PDT

    •  Barry...

      ...two things.  Number one, my point is that you had ample case to make your argument in GMT's diary, and did so.  And while I didn't agree with you, I made my feelings and issues with the thread clear to GMT, and his to me.  So why on earth we need to rehash the whole damn conversation is beyond me.

      Number two, you are wrong about GMT and his use of the cartoons.  Blackface is racist, right?  But it isn't racist in Bamboozled by Spike Lee, because he's making a satiric and insightful commentary about what we won't talk about because we don't want to offend.  Which was GMT's intent, regardless of the skill we think he applied to the attempt.

      So let the damn thing go.  Everyone said their piece.  GMT isn't an anti-semite or a troll.  So what is the point?

      by Jay Elias on Fri Jun 16, 2006 at 04:32:30 PM PDT

      •  With all due respect...

        And I mean this honestly - I hear what you're saying - I wish I'd found the cartoons when the diary was first posted.  But I actually had work to do, and couldn't find time till now.

        I think GMT may have made a mistake, and he can admit that.  Yet the cartoons remain, and they make DailyKos look like shit.

        by barryannarbor on Fri Jun 16, 2006 at 04:35:50 PM PDT

        •  Well...

          ...I know you think he made a mistake.  He doesn't agree (and I'm just assuming he's a he to begin with).  So the diary is going to stay.  Lots more offensive things stay on the servers of dKos.

          In any case, you've taken it up with GMT.  You've taken it up with the community.  What more do you want, exactly?

          by Jay Elias on Fri Jun 16, 2006 at 04:38:31 PM PDT

          •  For this to be given equal discussion.

            We need this matter to be discussed.  Jay, I honestly think that GMT has really hurt this site.  Israyale made it to the recommended diary list.  Do we tolerate bigotry, or not?

            by barryannarbor on Fri Jun 16, 2006 at 04:43:15 PM PDT

            •  Well...

              ...I think it has been given equal discussion.  And in response to your second question, of course we tolerate bigotry.  We tolerate it every day.  And we can't crush it like this anyway, but rather harden the hearts of those who recommended the other diary against us.  You were not the only one to express concern in GMT's diary, which is part of why it got so long.  Another diary which refuted the narrative of Isryale made the rec list too.

              I'm just saying, I don't see how this helps.  It happened, it wasn't great, it is over now, except that we're all reliving it here.  Except I have to go to a concert, so have a great night Barry, and cheers to you.

              by Jay Elias on Fri Jun 16, 2006 at 04:48:52 PM PDT

      •  I wish I could believe you

        But GMT left little doubt as to his hateful intentions. I know it's natural to want to believe the best about people, especially somewhere like this. But ignorant and dishonest bigotry is not the sole domain of the right.

        by Red Sox on Sat Jun 17, 2006 at 06:23:52 AM PDT

        •  I don't think it is bigotry...

          ...as much as faulty understanding.

          Again, I didn't like the diary, and I don't agree with the diarist.  But I think ascribing "hateful intentions" to him is mistaken, to say the least.

          by Jay Elias on Sat Jun 17, 2006 at 11:33:20 AM PDT

    •  I'm both a gentile and very critical of Israeli..

      ...government policies towards the Palestinians (read up on my comments if you want). However, I agree with you that those cartoons--certainly the "gefilte fishes" cartoon--are antisemitic.

      The "gefilte fishes" cartoon in particular is antisemitic because it takes the allegation that 1) certain Jews or groups of Jews have derailed Juan Cole's potential employment at Yale, and interprets that as if 2) all Jews had done so. The gefilte fish/mafia joke, by referencing Jewish culture (as opposed to employing a reference that specifically targets contemporary Jewry's right-wing minority) makes Jews in general--rather than, say, right-wing Zionists--the object of the allegation. And, of course, the cartoon doesn't take into account that the vast majority of Zionists in the US are fundamentalist Christians, and that Jews were most likely not the only people working against Cole.

      I think we are going to see a lot more antisemitism from the left in the coming years as the result of the roles played by organizations like AIPAC, and even the ADL, in shilling for the Iraq war. People unfortunately appear to be incapable of differentiating between the actions of the far right of the Jewish spectrum of political opinion (remember that most US Jews were against the Iraq war, not to mention a substantial portion of Israelis) and Jews in general.

      by StupidAsshole on Fri Jun 16, 2006 at 04:42:49 PM PDT

      •  If there's one redeeming feature

        to this thread, it's the gratifying demonstration that not everyone in the Kos Jewish community thinks like barryannarbor.

        by corvo on Fri Jun 16, 2006 at 06:16:59 PM PDT

        •  You have no idea what I think.

          You don't know me, you really don't no my political views.

          I don't want Israel denigrated on DailyKos on a daily basis.  There should be some reasonable balance in these discussions.  We can't accept calling Israeli's murderers, rascists, barbarians, whatever without qualification.  DailyKos members should not simply ignore the actions of the Palestinians.

          Anything wrong with that idea?

          This diary is about the cartoons - do you have an opinion about them?

          by barryannarbor on Fri Jun 16, 2006 at 06:23:28 PM PDT

          •  I know what you've posted here

            and on GMT's thread (hint: you're only repeating yourself ad nauseam); that's what I was referring to; that's really more than enough, thank you very much; and if you really think I meant otherwise, then clean your glasses--all the bogeymen in them seem to be obscuring your vision.

            by corvo on Fri Jun 16, 2006 at 06:54:30 PM PDT

            •  And you - and GMT - and friends...

              Won't answer the question: what about the cartoons?  It seems to me that you're running from the issue at hand.

              by barryannarbor on Fri Jun 16, 2006 at 07:28:12 PM PDT

              •  I think that there are more important

                things in life than humoring you.

                by corvo on Fri Jun 16, 2006 at 07:33:13 PM PDT

        •  IOW

          "They're not all bad people."

          by Red Sox on Sat Jun 17, 2006 at 06:11:42 AM PDT

•  I thought GMT's diary

  was a good one.  

  by calderonn on Fri Jun 16, 2006 at 03:17:18 PM PDT

•  To quote Carlin

  "leave symbols to the symbol-minded."

  by PTK Bear on Fri Jun 16, 2006 at 03:21:10 PM PDT

•  It's just a cartoon...

  I can understand how this is offensive to some. But, the fact remains that Cole was blackballed by those who wish to silence disent.

  Not by Jews, but by Neocons... Still it's only a cartoon...

  by Sanuk on Fri Jun 16, 2006 at 03:21:33 PM PDT

  •  And how do you know this is a fact? n/t

    by another American on Fri Jun 16, 2006 at 03:25:10 PM PDT

    •  Wasn't Cole blackballed? n/t

      by Sanuk on Fri Jun 16, 2006 at 03:29:21 PM PDT

      •  How do you know he was 'blackballed'?

        Unless you mean that any candidate denied tenure by a faculty appointments committee is "blackballed."  But then why use such an emotive word?

        Unless you have direct contact with committee members at Yale, you know no more than I, namely, that the faculty committee voted against offering Cole a tenured position.

        
        
        

        by another American on Fri Jun 16, 2006 at 03:41:31 PM PDT

        •  That's why I asked... n/t

          by Sanuk on Fri Jun 16, 2006 at 03:43:42 PM PDT

        •  did you read GMT's diary and the sources?

          apparently not.

          by thomaswilliam on Fri Jun 16, 2006 at 03:57:08 PM PDT

          •  I did

            and I am not satisfied

            He misrepresented what the article he quoted said

            unless he has other sources the premise of his diary -- that Jewish donors played a crucial role in causeing Yale to reject Cole's appointment -- remains unsupported

            by bleargh on Fri Jun 16, 2006 at 04:12:24 PM PDT

            •  you have a reading problem then

              he did nothing of the sort, nor was that the premise of his diary in anyone's but the most twisted of minds.

              by thomaswilliam on Fri Jun 16, 2006 at 04:27:12 PM PDT

              •  from the diary:

                I have a problem with the fact that Yale decided not to hire someone because a bunch of Israel-first, rightwing flacks went and scared Yale's Jewish donors, and they in turn scared administrators at Yale.

                by bleargh on Fri Jun 16, 2006 at 04:49:00 PM PDT

                •  from your signature

                  judgments are wrong

                  by thomaswilliam on Fri Jun 16, 2006 at 06:19:16 PM PDT

                •  perfect

                  troll-rate me in (non-)response

                  that is equivalent to calling gmt or juan cole an anti-semite.

                  you have nothing to say.

                  pathetic.

                  by thomaswilliam on Sat Jun 17, 2006 at 09:30:51 AM PDT

                  •  Except...

                    ...he provided you with an exact example from GMT's opus of hate, as you requested, and you in turn cherry-picked something out of his sig, unrelated to the subject. The troll rating was clearly justified.

                    by Red Sox on Sat Jun 17, 2006 at 10:45:09 AM PDT

                    •  you really have a reading comprehension problem

                      i didn't request anything

                      what he provided was "cherry-picked"--i.e., wasn't the "premise" of the diary (or "opus of hate" as you call it--gee, is someone biased????)

                      thus, my response was entirely appropriate, to quote something completely out of context

                      thanks for your input, though.  i'd prefer if you left me alone, though, or find a proxy with reading skills to do your blabbering for you.

                      by thomaswilliam on Sat Jun 17, 2006 at 02:24:38 PM PDT

                      •  You poor thing

                        I realize you're frustrated by being boxed into an indefensable position, but you would do well to remember the old axiom, "Better to keep your mouth closed and be thought a fool than to open it and remove all doubt."

                        Just some helpful advice. Cheers!

                        by Red Sox on Sun Jun 18, 2006 at 12:41:12 PM PDT

                        •  how lame

                          you can't seem to comment on anything without misrepresenting someone else's statements.

                          what position have i taken that would be indefensable (sic)?

                          you are an airhead.

                          by thomaswilliam on Sun Jun 18, 2006 at 02:33:34 PM PDT

                  •  no, you are a troll

                    You said GMT didn't say something that he did say.  I quoted from the diary and showed he did say it.  In response you tried to say my .sig says something it doesn't.

                    Unless you are completely lost, you are just trolling.

                    by bleargh on Sat Jun 17, 2006 at 10:45:20 AM PDT

                    •  joker

                      you are a complete joker.

                      what did i say gmt didn't say?????

                      you really are a moron.

                      by thomaswilliam on Sat Jun 17, 2006 at 02:26:22 PM PDT

  •  dont bother

    barry is only seeing his offense at the pictures and ignoring what GMT had said.

    So i supsect we will be hearing this for a few days before a new outrage happens (i bet it will be GMT next  piece no doubt with direct reference to this)

    by PTK Bear on Fri Jun 16, 2006 at 03:25:39 PM PDT

•  While I didn't choose to rehash this issue,

  the antisemitic character of the gefilte fish cartoon seemed obvious to me.  Surely, it's no better, and in many cases worse, than the Danish cartoons that so many people here were unwilling to defend, or even attacked, notwithstanding freedom of speech.

  It's striking, too, that a subsequent writer, with access to the relevant Yale faculty committee, debunked the notion that the decision not to offer Cole tenure resulted from outside pressure.  The readiness of some to give credence to the conspiracy theory, without any real evidence, is worrying.

  Since I'm one of those who defended publication of the cartoons, I should hasten to say that I defend the original diarist's right to publish the gefilte fish cartoon.  Whether he has a right to publish it here raises a different issue, of course.  Daily Kos has community norms and is subject to the general rule of Kos himself.  Personally, I would support a general prohibition on publishing, e.g., anything racist (including antisemitic) or sexist, in the absence of some specific, articulated reason(s) for making an exception in a particular case.

  by another American on Fri Jun 16, 2006 at 03:24:08 PM PDT

  •  and..

    did you read what GMT wrote?

    or did you not bother since the cartoons bothered you?

    by PTK Bear on Fri Jun 16, 2006 at 03:28:04 PM PDT

    •  Of course I read it.

      That's what enabled me to make the substantive comments contrasting his conspiracy-mongering with the dKos member with inside information.

      In all events, I expect more people on and around the Yale faculty committee to talk.  In a few weeks, or next fall at the latest, much more will be known.  Since Professor Cole is downplaying the whole affair, I don't see why anyone else can't wait patiently for more facts to emerge.

      
      
      

      by another American on Fri Jun 16, 2006 at 03:39:09 PM PDT

  •  Yup.

    a subsequent writer, with access to the relevant Yale faculty committee, debunked the notion that the decision not to offer Cole tenure resulted from outside pressure.

    That would be here.

    by Karmafish on Fri Jun 16, 2006 at 03:35:35 PM PDT

    •  wow

      I missed that

      Grand Moff Texan has been uncharacteristically quiet about all this...

      by bleargh on Fri Jun 16, 2006 at 04:20:35 PM PDT

  •  That ''outside pressure'' you speak of...

    ...where did that come from. As I said above, it wasn't Jews, but Neocons.

    And, OK, if not Neocons and/or Bush apologists then who?

    by Sanuk on Fri Jun 16, 2006 at 03:38:17 PM PDT

    •  Nevermind this comment...

      Karmafish gives a great answer above...

      by Sanuk on Fri Jun 16, 2006 at 03:45:13 PM PDT

  •  But who defines 'racist'?

    And do we give the most easily offended a "heckler's veto" over what the rest of the community sees? That is a dangerous path to take.

    by Dump Terry McAuliffe on Fri Jun 16, 2006 at 03:44:31 PM PDT

    •  Agreed..

      We don't want to suppress freedom of speech, but we should try to avoid outright slander.

      I'm the heckler.  Actually, I'm the "vindictive little pussy" referred to in the Israyale diary's tags.

      And the point I'm trying to make is that when it was argued that the cartoon was anti-Semitic, the author - and many other Kossacks - tried to shout down the point.

      If we post something, we have to accept criticism for it.  

      by barryannarbor on Fri Jun 16, 2006 at 03:53:26 PM PDT

      •  I'm with you on that

        We do have the power to comment and troll-rate: the best answer to a bad argument is a strong one.

        by Dump Terry McAuliffe on Fri Jun 16, 2006 at 03:55:28 PM PDT

      •  Your making it out to be Anti-Semitic

        I view it as a cartoon, with no meaning to it..*i knwo your agruement.. im not jewish, so i dont have that "connection" to it.*

        Do you find it offenseive that the native americans are still keep penned up in concentration camps opps i mean reservations?

        Look..what happened was a terrible thing... however if you keep looking for boogey men.. all you will see is boogey men.

        by PTK Bear on Fri Jun 16, 2006 at 04:01:26 PM PDT

        •  I lived and taught on a res

          Do you find it offenseive that the native americans are still keep penned up in concentration camps opps i mean reservations?

          Your question has some underlying assumptions which are wrong.

          Recognized tribal groups have sovereignty over their lands.   One can hardly call land that belongs to one's people and is controlled by one's people  a concentration camp.   Frankly, many of the Native Americans I worked with would be highly offended by the suggestion.

          People in concentration camps are by definition not free.  They are restricited to a small, enclosed space.  Their schedule is dictated by those guarding them.  This is not true of Native Americans or of reservations.  They police themselves and they can choose to live on or off the reservation.  

          by Pumpkinlove on Fri Jun 16, 2006 at 04:12:36 PM PDT

    •  Yep

      One of the liberal sides problems is that they have to take the lowest common denominator in every argument.  If it can possibly offend anyone, it cannot be said.  This lowers our ability to get noticed, to be heard, to gain consensus.  I'm sorry you can't trust GMT to have the best thoughts of the community in mind when he did his diary.  I think trying to make a case for anti-semitism in this case shows a lack of trust in our fellow bloggers.  You want to create a wedge where there really isn't one?  Why?  It hurts us all.

      by FLDemJax on Fri Jun 16, 2006 at 04:08:08 PM PDT

      •  Woops

        The "you" in the previous post is intended for the diarist.

        by FLDemJax on Fri Jun 16, 2006 at 04:08:44 PM PDT

      •  The diary is fine...

        Even if I disagree with the diary.  I think Juan Cole is a capable scholar who deserves respect - I said so in response to the original Israyale diary.  Sometimes, though, you don't get the job you want. The author has some dubious sources, but he certainly can believe what he wants to believe.

        It's the cartoons that I'm concerned about.  They were unnecessary, they were bigoted, and they hurt this site and his case.  What do you think of the cartoons?

        by barryannarbor on Fri Jun 16, 2006 at 04:11:39 PM PDT

        •  I Thought The Cartoons

          were selected to make a specific point, which they did.  Unfortunately, I think the point was garbled in transmission, and people sensitive to certain issues are quick to find boogeymen under every rock.

          And I am married to a Jew who agrees with me.  That's my only credentials to this discussion.

          by FLDemJax on Fri Jun 16, 2006 at 04:25:25 PM PDT

      •  The cartoons were the wedge.

        And you want to talk about who it hurts.. how do you think the rest of the world will perceive Daily KOS and the Dem's who are supported by us if this crap is supported with recommendations?

        by Pumpkinlove on Fri Jun 16, 2006 at 04:14:23 PM PDT

        •  Recommendations

          A lot of articles get recommends here that are not worth the effort to press the button.  It is nature of this blog to give wind to many small ideas.  I'll take the occasionally sucky diary in exchange.  I am NOT willing to change my opinion on diarists just because they dropped one turd.

          by FLDemJax on Fri Jun 16, 2006 at 04:27:48 PM PDT

          •  I don't know GMT

            but that diary was a turd.

            Hopefully his next one will be better.

            by Pumpkinlove on Fri Jun 16, 2006 at 04:34:41 PM PDT

            •  Grand Moff Texan

              The subject of this diary. Please keep up.

              by FLDemJax on Fri Jun 16, 2006 at 04:35:47 PM PDT

              •  Yes, I know what the subject is

                I just don't recall reading anything by him from before the Isryale post.  He's not someone whom I remember reading before.

                The Isryale diary was bad.

                I hope his next one will be better.

                by Pumpkinlove on Fri Jun 16, 2006 at 04:40:34 PM PDT

                •  GMT writes a fair number of diaries.

                  As far as I know this was the only one that caused any kind of an uproard.

                  by Karmafish on Fri Jun 16, 2006 at 04:41:50 PM PDT

                •  He Is a Fairly Frequent Diarist

                  and he's pretty good.  He has his own blog as well, just google for it.  Been reading him for a couple of years now and seems to be edgy but has his heart in the right place.  IMHO

                  by FLDemJax on Fri Jun 16, 2006 at 04:43:42 PM PDT

                  •  Then I know he will do better next time

                    by Pumpkinlove on Fri Jun 16, 2006 at 05:03:53 PM PDT

            •  GMT is one of the best writers on dKos

              IMO. For instance, read this diary or this diary (there was a spectacular GMT diary in there that I can't seem to find, that was the greatest of all). His diaries and DarkSyde's diaries are the only diaries (other than Kos' maybe) that I've read and been literally blown away by. I think they are the three best writers on DailyKos. Hunter as well is close to this level. I guess MB would round out the top five on the site IMO.

              by Opakapaka on Sat Jun 17, 2006 at 12:37:41 PM PDT

              •  GMT as diarist, and these cartoons

                GMT may be able to write some dramatic, angry diaries.  He'll call bullshit, say someone's stupid, and generally show he's angry.  He calls his opponents fools, idiots, the list goes on.

                Even if he's what you would call "one of the best writers on dKos" - something I don't agree with - he still showed a spectacular lack of judgement in commissioning the cartoons.

                GMT also claims legitamacy as an academic (what kind of academic, I'm not sure).  Thus he, of all self-appointed people, should understand the use of political cartoons in history.

                by barryannarbor on Sat Jun 17, 2006 at 03:37:03 PM PDT

  •  Danish Cartoons

    I agree that the cartoons here were anti-Semitic and therefore fair game for criticism. But they were not deliberately so, while the Danish cartoons were very much a deliberate provocation of a persecuted community. Everybody likes to think the Danes are so tolerant, but they won't tolerate the construction of a mosque in Copenhagen or a muslim cemetary in all of Denmark, forcing observant muslims to send their dead overseas for burial! I'm not a big one for walking on eggshells around peoples (superstitious) religious beliefs, but its critical to recognize larger context and the very real and intentionally hateful content of (some of) those cartoons. I highly recommend that folks read Art Spiegelman's article on the whole affair in the New Yorker a month or so back. They reprinted the cartoons and Spiegelman reviewed them for artistic and comic merit. It was very well done.

    by Christopher Day on Fri Jun 16, 2006 at 06:01:42 PM PDT

•  The real pity...

  ...is that this diary is garnering more comments than this one, which manages to find the hope and possibility of reconciliation in the Gaza beach deaths.

  Contentiousness I suppose always outdoes promise.

  by Jay Elias on Fri Jun 16, 2006 at 03:37:32 PM PDT

•  Israyale

  I am a Jew, child of the depression, of the years when Hitler came to power, when the rest of the world looked the other way as Jews - for no other reason than that they were Jews - were hauled off to the camps and murdered. Anytime something like these cartoons appear, I get a cold, clammy feeling and a tightening of my stomach muscles. Somehow, I can hear the "Sieg-Heil" in the background.

  I don't know why Juan Cole was denied tenure but I do know that cartoons like the ones in this diary do little to foster a civilized discussion and understanding of the issue. Since we now live in an America where there is a very serious assault on our most basic constitutional freedoms, this is particularly disturbing.

  by skilfor on Fri Jun 16, 2006 at 03:47:28 PM PDT

  •  I agree.

    I don't think that GMT meant to be offensive.  I have no reason to believe his intentions were anything but honorable.  Nonetheless, the imagery of those cartoons was a bit too close to anti-semitism.  

    It's better to call that kind of material out than to just let it ride.  We don't need to get hysterical and we don't need to get insulting (we are, afterall, among Kossacks) but we should at least respond.

    by Karmafish on Fri Jun 16, 2006 at 04:09:04 PM PDT

    •  Well...

      I have no reason to believe his intentions were anything but honorable.

      ...would his own words suffice?

      by Red Sox on Sat Jun 17, 2006 at 08:35:53 AM PDT

•  I'm a Whitey-Boy

  And I can't say I'm flattered by the Poppy-Bush look-alike stereotype in the cartoon myself!

  This diarist, I will say, posted on yesterday's thread that he supports Israel being a "Jewish state," and claimed also to have no objection to Denmark, Norway, and the U.K. being "Christian states."

  Respectfully, I object to the comparison.  It's true that Denmark and Norway impose (small) taxes for the support of the established Lutheran churches in those countries.  I don't know if the U.K. does likewise.  The established churches in those countries are, essentially, relics, and not comparable to Israeli policies aimed at achieving a nearly Arab-free, goy-free Israeli nation.

  In other words, while there ARE established churches in those countries, except for the unoppressive taxes, I don't believe anyone who is not of the established church suffers one drop of legal disability as a result.

  Which is a good thing for the churches, as hardly anyone attends regularly in those three countries anyhow.

  In Israel, there are quite a few policies that favor Jews, and disfavor non-Jews.  There is even a semi-official policy, and (opinion polls show) a widely-shared desire on the part of the Jewish population, favoring that the non-Jews living in Israel emigrate, and go to live elsewhere.

  The founders of the Israeli state by and large favored expansion of Israel's borders well beyond those established in 1948, and I'm not aware of any that stated that Arabs and Jews could or ought to live shoulder-to-shoulder in peace and amity.

  The program was then, and I am unconvinced that it does not remain today, one of expelling Arabs and non-Jews from as much territory in the region as possible, to welcome an ingathering of as many Jews from anywhere in the world as could be convinced to come, and if possible to achieve an Israel extending from the "Euphrates to the River of Egypt."

  I am certain there are left-wing Jews in Israel who would renounce that kind of aggrandizement in a heartbeat for a deal with the Palestinians, but if the diarist, or other Zionists here, know of any prominent Israeli Jewish political figure from 1948 until today, Labour, Likud, or other, who has consistently and before Israeli audiences (not merely to Merkan aid donors) renounced territorial expansion, I'd love to have links, references cited to me, etc.

  Also, contemporary England, Norway, and Denmark are not actively encouraging their Jewish populations, or their non-Christian populations, to emigrate.

  The last time I looked, Denmark and Norway were not encroaching upon neighboring countries' territory, shooting non-Lutheran children dead by the hundreds, or bulldozing non-Lutherans' homes.  (Having some Viking ancestry, I do acknowledge that the Scandinavians did some bad-ass stuff, back in the day.)

  Living as I do in New York, I have been distressed by attitudes expressed by (a number of) otherwise decent Jews of my acquaintance who, although seemingly liberal and open-minded on most subjects, express crudely racist and violent attitudes toward Arabs.  ("They are animals, we should kill them all and take their land, Israel has accomplished much, the Arabs have accomplished shit, etc., etc.")

  I don't blame only the Jews for the pickle there in the Middle East.  But if Jews would (rightly) object to Christians being forbidden to sell land in the U.S. to Jews, how can Israeli policies, restricting the residence, or acquisition of real property by non-Jews in Israel be defended as anything but unequal treatment, based on religion or religious background, and a bad thing?

  I wish the Jews of Israel no harm, but so long as they believe, many of them -- or certainly give the appearance of believing -- that their cruelty toward their Arab neighbors is licit, and that the non-Jews within Israel and in neighboring countries are sub-human, they cannot have peace, and will not have peace.

  I hasten to add that, so long as "Christian" America murders Iraqis, and starves, threatens, exploits, "black-ops," and otherwise abuses people all over the world, we will not have peace, either.

  by Take Me to Tango on Fri Jun 16, 2006 at 04:18:47 PM PDT

  •  This is off topic.

    by Karmafish on Fri Jun 16, 2006 at 04:25:24 PM PDT

  •  Not sure what you mean.

    This diarist, I will say, posted on yesterday's thread that he supports Israel being a "Jewish state," and claimed also to have no objection to Denmark, Norway, and the U.K. being "Christian states."

    I don't remember saying that.

    I've supported what's referred to as left wing in Israel, first Meretz, then Labour.  I come from a family that's actually worked together with both Palestinians and Israeli Arabs for decades - social workers in northern Israel.  I studied with Jordanians, Palestinians, and Israeli Jews in southern Israel.  

    Most Israelis are not what you depict - we've got our bad seeds, as do all countries.  We need to deal with them, and make it clear bigotry won't be accepted.

    But you have to recognize that our opponents often portray us - in their media, in thier speeches, and in their actions as being animals, worthy of slaughter.

    BTW, I'm focusing on the cartoons.  Criticism of Israel is a good thing - it's a democracy, and it needs to stay true to what the Socialist founders of the state wanted - not how the Likud has attempted to move the country.

    But in this matter, how do you feel about the cartoons?

    by barryannarbor on Fri Jun 16, 2006 at 04:26:47 PM PDT

  •  Back up

    It's true that Denmark and Norway impose (small) taxes for the support of the established Lutheran churches in those countries.  I don't know if the U.K. does likewise.  The established churches in those countries are, essentially, relics, and not comparable to Israeli policies aimed at achieving a nearly Arab-free, goy-free Israeli nation.

    Arabs are roughly 1/5 of Israel's population and Arabic is one of two national languages.  How is that Arab free?  

    Israel as a Jewish nation has very little impact on the daily lives of its people.  It mainly impacts the calendar.. ie.. Jewish holidays instead of Christian ones.  Most things close down from Friday night to Saturday night for Shabbat (like most things were closed on Sunday when I was a girl).

    There are Jewish prayers and symbols in the Knesset instead of Christian ones we have in Congress.

    There are multiple school systems but parents have a choice (though it may require transportation on their part depending on how far away they live from a school of chocie).  There are secular schools in Hebrew, Arabic schools, religious schools and then there is the 'private' school system for the orthodox.  All recieve state funding and are inspected by the state.  There are some schools which teach in both Hebrew and Arabic like some schools in the SW teach in Spanish and English.

    The biggest policy towards keeping a Jewish majority is the right of return  which allows any Jew, child or grandchild of a Jew to immigrate to Israel.

    Things are perfect, there is discrimination but it is hardly what you describe.

    by Pumpkinlove on Fri Jun 16, 2006 at 04:27:20 PM PDT

  •  On the other stuff.

    You should probably attempt to read some of the Israeli papers to see how we feel about the other issues.  We're not planning to expand the country from the Euphrates to the Nile - that's just bs.  Sorry, can't think of a nice way to say it.  

    Some of your other ideas appear to be a bit disconnected from normal Israeli reality.

    Please - you should also check what the Arabs have said, many times, about how they want to handle our civilian population.

    by barryannarbor on Fri Jun 16, 2006 at 04:29:16 PM PDT

  •  Arab mythology regarding Israel flag

    The founders of the Israeli state by and large favored expansion of Israel's borders well beyond those established in 1948, and I'm not aware of any that stated that Arabs and Jews could or ought to live shoulder-to-shoulder in peace and amity.

    The program was then, and I am unconvinced that it does not remain today, one of expelling Arabs and non-Jews from as much territory in the region as possible, to welcome an ingathering of as many Jews from anywhere in the world as could be convinced to come, and if possible to achieve an Israel extending from the "Euphrates to the River of Egypt."

    The only people I have ever heard make this assertion are Arabs commenting upon the Israeli flag and other people repeating this.  The often repeat the idea that the two blue stripes in the Israeli flag represent the Euphrates and Nile rivers which Israel supposedly wants as their boundaries.

    The blue stripes respresent the traditional stripes on a Jewish prayer shawl, a talit, which has been used for hundreds of years.

    Furthermore, Israel gave back the Sinai which contradicts the whole notion.

    by Pumpkinlove on Fri Jun 16, 2006 at 04:30:00 PM PDT

  •  I'm mostly in due diligence mode.

    Respectfully, I object to the comparison

    Enjoyed your post.  Valid views, well thought out and delivered well.

    by Polticalrecluse on Fri Jun 16, 2006 at 05:06:26 PM PDT

•  Godwin lives

  by lorenzodow on Fri Jun 16, 2006 at 04:45:57 PM PDT

  •  Can't invoke Godwin's on this one...

    Jews.  Conspiracy.  Godwin's law doesn't apply here.

    by barryannarbor on Fri Jun 16, 2006 at 04:49:08 PM PDT

    •  I was thinking of your post of the

      cartoons.  Godwin was fulfilled almost at the top of the thread.  I don't have a dog in this fight, just noting it.

      by lorenzodow on Fri Jun 16, 2006 at 05:30:33 PM PDT

•  It had to be said....

  and I'm glad that Barry from Ann Arbor stood up and made known a concern many of us expressed about the obvious antiSemitic nature of the depiction of Jews and Jewish myths in the cartoons. It still bothers me and I'm not even Jewish. Well, you shouldn't have to be Jewish to be troubled by this kind of thing. As Barry clearly pointed out, any type of ethnic or religious stereotyping is demeaning and destructive.

  That it was tolerated in a diary on a progressive-liberal blog is even more disturbing.

  by shergald on Fri Jun 16, 2006 at 04:48:48 PM PDT

•  Thank you

  Some people are asking you to leave this alone.  I disagree.

  GMT's diary was atrocious.  Devoid of any real facts.  It was speculation laced with name calling with a frolic into conspiracy theories.

  And the cartoons were just disgusting.  Of course, when some of us pointed this out, we get the ritualistic incantation "Criticism of Israeli policy isn't antisemitic."

  Perhaps not.  But unfounded accusations of blackballing by Jewish...er...Zionist...forces combined with cartoons that subtly borrow from Nazi propaganda.  I'll call that antisemitic any day.

  by JPhurst on Fri Jun 16, 2006 at 07:28:56 PM PDT

•  I think I've got good pro-Israel and Jewish..

  ... credentials.

  I'm getting in on this very late because I missed the original diary (i live in NZ)

  Because of the context, I did not find GMT's diary to be anti-Semetic.  Some of the cartoons might have been in bad taste and might have crossed the line, but I don't think it's a big deal because of the context.

  Context is very, VERY important. The context tells us if this is a legitimate critique or one with roots in anti-Semitism.

  Not everyone who criticizes Israel is an anti-Semite.

  There is a problem with the neocon/Likud nexus. Israeli politics are no more immune to self-serving corruption and arrogance than US politics are.  Some of Israel’s supporters in the US are right-wing bastards.

  However, there are virulent pockets of anti-Semitism on the Left and dKos is not immune.   There are anti-Semites who use the neocon/Likud axis as a convenient tool for their anti-Zionist cause.  They use this axis to unconditionally conflate Israel's existence and security with the neocon agenda.

  So, we have a very, very complicated situation here.

  There is appropriate and just criticism of Israel in general and of the neocon/Likud axis in particular.  There are also bad Jews just like there are bad ___.  Unfortunately, anti-Semites do use these facts to advance their agenda.  So that muddies the water making it more difficult to distinguish between appropriate criticism of issues regarding Israel and criticisms that are motivated by crypto-anti-Semitism.

  There are some Jews who are too quick to throw out the anti-Semite accusations; but that doesn't that mean that they are all Likudniks embracing the neocons.  

  By the same token, there are some Kossacks who are insensitive to Jewish concerns; but that doesn't mean they are anti-Semites.

  Because of these conditions, we have a confusing and volatile situation here. Kossacks have to be cognizant of the fact that there are anti-Semites posting on dKos; so they should take that into account when they post diaries or comments that could be construed as being anti-Semitic. By the same token, Jews on dKos have to be cognizant of the fact that strong criticisms of Israel, AIPAC or the Likud/neocon axis are not necessarily inspired by anti-Semitism.

  by xynz on Fri Jun 16, 2006 at 07:42:44 PM PDT

  •  How many time are we gonna see this old hat?

    Not everyone who criticizes Israel is an anti-Semite.

    No one, and I mean no one, on this site would disagree with you on this point. And yet every time someone expresses anti-Semitism in terms of Israel, this line is either trotted out pre-emptively, or <emex-post</em> to innoculate one's ugly sentiments.

    I think you make good points, and I think some people are too quick to accuse people of lots of things, including anti-Semitism. But it's also right to call a spade a spade.

    by Red Sox on Sat Jun 17, 2006 at 06:20:03 AM PDT

    •  If you look at some of my comments...

      ...you'll see that I have not hesitated to jump all over anti-Semitic comments.

      by xynz on Sat Jun 17, 2006 at 08:03:44 PM PDT