Introducing Blogs of Zion

Ariel Beery, co-founder of The Creative Zionist Circle, and Aharon Horowitz, one of the individuals featured in the controversial documentary Columbia Unbecoming, are pleased to announce the launch of Blogs of Zion.

Blogs of Zion is an on-line forum for Zionists from across the ideological and social spectrum to decipher, develop and debate issues affecting the Jewish people around the world.

The site, which features a collection of blogs presenting viewpoints ranging from the socialist Left to the religious Right, is sponsored by The American Zionist Movement and was built and designed by Matzat (ie., yours truly).

19 thoughts on “Introducing Blogs of Zion

  1. Given your opposition to reservationizing the Palestinians, why would you build a site for “The David Project” an organization allied to the Christian zionists, and an organization that demonizes even moderate Palestinians like Joseph Massad, and the Sabeel Center. Did you work for them probono?

  2. Dameocrat, your question doesn’t work, because it is based on a false premise — “The David Project” does not correspond to your description of it.

  3. It most certainly does. I have posted about their slanderous claims about the Sabeel Center before. They claimed they supported terrorism, and allied themselves with christian zionists stand for Israel in this smear, then they showed their right wing colors by claiming Sabeel extremists for defending the two holy mosques from attacks by “The Temple Faithful”.

  4. I am not sure why you think that having said these things before lends greater weight to them.Then as now your spin borders on demonisation.

  5. Now maybe you are trying to clean up your act, but erasing files doesn’t mean it didn’t happen. I’m not sure who “you” is; you seem to be confusing readers willing to call you on bullshit, with the objects of your criticism. That doesn’t seem a particularly good bet to make. In my case, it happens to be wrong.
    So the website erased the file. Google http://www.c4rpme.org/&hl=en&c…>didn’t.. Anyway, I am betting mobius remembers my post. This article discusses Sabeel’s divestment campaign, argues that it is anti-Israel, and ties it to a larger pattern of what it alleges is an anti-Israel position generally. It does so by relying on quotes on so on. One can validly disagree, and one can make an argument in the opposite direction. On the other hand, your attempt to paint their criticism as invalid and boycott-worthy does not strike me as very evenhanded. I would suggest you criticise, not demonise. Use your words.
    Here is another goodie where the david project claims sabeel a christian organization supports intolerance against http://www.c4rpme.org/&hl=en&c…>christians. LOL. and excuses terror. Yes, they certanly seem to be upset about what Sabeel has to say. That, in turn, certainly seems to upset you. I do not understand why you feel this requires demonising the David Project, apparently one of the groups which supports the coalition whose cached Web site you linked to.
    The brunt of your argument seems to be that Joseph Massad and Sabeel constitute moderate voices and, therefore, that anyone disagreeing with them should be considered beyond the pale. I am almost completely unfamiliar with Sabeel. Joseph Massad’s alleged moderation is not a universal or even widely-held view, unless of course one confines one’s sample to a very narrow swathe of the spectrum.
    You have not convinced me.

  6. i don’t account for the political perspectives of either ariel beery or aharon horowtiz. nor was i employed by the david project. i know ariel and aharon as people in the real world. despite our differences — because, hell, why would the david project give money to the anti-zionist zionist — on a personal and professional level, they’re good guys, and i support the project: a website which gives voice to the diverse spectrum of views within the zionist community and which demonstrates that not all zionists are right-wing religious fascists. a man’s got to eat, and frankly, i don’t mind eating from a project which can help open up dialogue in the jewish community.

  7. They don’t just support the coalition. The man that heads the david project wrote the article which among other things claims the two holy mosques are a “conspiracy against Jewish Culture” and that Sabeel are extremists beyond the pale who should be marginalized for protecting them from attacks by Jewish extremists. They demonized themselves, which is probably why the articles got erased. My bet is lawsuites were forthcoming.
    Mobius, I am sure one could personally like Dick Cheney as well. I”ll bet they have a narrow definition of Zionist which will not include people who advocate two states. Beery worked for Daniel Pipes’s Campus Watch, which was nothing less than a McCarthyite organization. I’ll bet the real purpose of this site is to put leftwing zionists beyond the pale of acceptability or to control them.

  8. btw, the article you linked to by massad states he think zionism is racism. I don’t take a positon on the matter, but I do know the modern application of zionism in the West Bank is indeed racist, and that Israel is the biggest perpetraitors of the zionism is racism meme though its own actions. I believe 90% of Palestinians, probably do believe zionism is racims and you can’t marginalize them from the debate just because of it. Blacks in the 60s probably held similar notions about America. For that matter American Indians probably wish America had not been founded. The purpose of the David Project is to silence 90% of the Palestinian people with the exception of people who will tolerate the racist practices of the modern Israeli State.

  9. Dameocrat has a funny way of dismissing and even demonizing anyone who criticizes one of her pet causes. Then she complains about McCartyism on the other side. People like her are very bad for the peace process. They bypass rational debate and impose a black and white, good vs. evil dicotomy on anyone who offers an opinion. Good is anyone who mimics her line. Evil is anyone who attempts to challenge it.
    Btw, there is nothing moderate about an organization like Sabeel that claims that Israel has no right to exist, but because of certain facts on the ground, cannot be uprooted easily, and therefore grudgingly accepts a two-state solution. If someone said Arabs should all be transfered out of Israel, but that wouldn’t really work so we’ll let them stay, I doubt they would be called moderate by anyone.


  10. maybe i’ll have more sympathy when the p.a. stops giving cash awards to families whose children strap bombs to themselves.
    dameocrat, its easy for you to be a palestinian solidarity activist from abroad. come here and walk the line between your own security and your commitment to your values.
    i oppose the occupation and i favor palestinian sovereignty. i also think that a number of the policies enacted by the israeli government are racist. but i would never call zionism racism.
    trying to stay alive in a world that’s been out to get you for 2,000 years and saying, “you know what, enough of this shit and fuck anyone who tries to take my freedom or my life” isn’t racist.
    palestinians hate jews. arabs hate jews. muslims hate jews. europeans hate jews.
    their words — their propaganda — these are not the barometer by which i hold israel accountable. i hold israel accountable by the torah. we’re accountable to our ethics. those who have rounded us up and killed us again and again — their ethical templates are for shit. and i won’t be heeding them anytime soon.
    so call me whatever you want for taking the evil racist zionists’ money. if this site can help awaken a consciousness among the majority of zionists that the occupation is wrong and needs to end, i’ll have made the impact i care to make.
    the only way left wing zionists can get sidelined/marginalized is when they say crazy shit that alienates people. so long as a responsible (ie., not batshit crazy) person is writing for that section, i don’t see how they could be marginalized.

  11. btw, the article you linked to by massad states he think zionism is racism.
    I suspect you would learn more if you read more carefully — outside, for instance, your ideological blinkers. Yes, he states Zionism is racism, obviously; that’s the mantra of every zealot who denied the Jewish people’s existence. And, just as obviously, not every anti-Zionist is racist; some just stand bitterly opposed to the United Nations and rule of law. But that’s not Joseph Massad’s reasoning; what the article does do is make clear that Massad is either of unaware of or dishonest about the history of the Jews and of Zionism, respectively.
    It is not clear what makes such a position a moderate one.

  12. The purpose of the David Project is to silence 90% of the Palestinian people with the exception of people who will tolerate the racist practices of the modern Israeli State.
    While I have no doubt you believe this to be true, you will not convince anyone else unless you actually provide evidence. What you have pointed to so far is not anyone trying to silence anyone; it is the David Project in one instance, and a coalition it apparently supports in another, airing its views.
    They call it public criticism; it’s an example of free speech, and it can get pretty heated out there. Its opposite is the kind of silencing based on boycotts grounded in unstated reasons that you sound like you are advocating, I daresay.

  13. Dameocrat, read the site. If you think that all Zionists are racists — meaning, if you are so damn closed minded that you can’t imagine the Jewish people might want the right to self-determination that every other peoples, including the Palestinians, deserves — then you probably will not like what you see. But if you have a universal ethic of rights, you might actually get into it.
    And, by the way, the site in no way has to do with the David Project. Aharon and I, along with a number of students, were aided by the David Project when professors abused their position in the classroom to politicize affairs. Joseph Massad was one of them, and the censoring thought petition is, frankly, after-the-fact BS. Massad is well known for his outspoken views, and even reputable Lefties think he is off the deep end: http://www.zeek.net/politics_0… (Even Said thought Massad needed to take a chill pill, by the way.)
    We had no power to silence anyone–we were just letting the student’s voices be heard, just like the professors were heard. We don’t control the media (even though we are Jews), we don’t control the university (I swear that neither Bollinger nor Brinkley are even Jews)–we just exercised our right to free speech. And I hope you respect public dissent.
    Also, I would hope that every one of Jewschool’s readers would decry racism and anti-Semitism when they saw it, and fight for the rights of students to be free from politicization in the classroom (just wait, if fifty years if the radical right gains in the Academy, who will protect the radicals?) But that is besides the point: that was then, this is now. People move on.
    So yeah–Check out the site, join the debate, and maybe we’ll all learn something.

  14. Ariel: “the censoring thought petition is, frankly, after-the-fact BS”
    Can you elaborate more on that? Yes, it is after the fact. Why is that significant? Only three students made this claim against Massad, and 23 students present later contradict it. Are you suggesting those 23 students are lying? If not, what explains the discrepency between what Deena and her associates claim, and the 23 who signed this “BS” petition?
    The Letter:
    May 3, 2005
    President Bollinger, Provost Brinkley, Vice-President Dirks:
    We the undersigned are deeply disturbed by the baseless
    accusations by Deena Shanker that Professor Joseph Massad
    acted inappropriately in a classroom discussion by raising his voice
    to her and telling her to leave his classroom. Unfortunately, this
    allegation has been affirmed by the report of the ad hoc committee,
    which deems it “credible,” and by President Bollinger’s public
    statements of 1 April 2005 on WNYC radio.
    We thus write to you in order to set the record straight and to
    exonerate Professor Massad from these unjust indictments. In order
    to correct these highly damaging factual errors, we avow the
    – That each of us was present during the Spring 2002 class
    referred to by Deena Shanker in her accusations and by the Ad
    Hoc Committee in its report.
    – That these accusations by Deena Shanker are unequivocally false
    and that the findings of the Ad Hoc Committee pertaining to them
    are incorrect.
    – That Professor Massad did not in any way order or even suggest
    to any student that she should leave his class, nor did he raise his
    voice to the student or react “heatedly” to her claims regarding the
    actions of the Israeli Defense Forces.
    – That Professor Massad consistently treated his students with
    respect and always adhered to a policy of encouraging students
    to participate in the class actively in classroom discussion and to
    think critically about the course materials.
    In light of our testimony, we call upon you to acknowledge these
    facts and defend Professor Joseph Massad against these
    erroneous charges and the finding that Shanker’s claim is
    Khalil Al-Salem, CC 2004
    Charlotte Anne Wurzburg Watts, CC 2004
    Alison Winfield, GS 2005
    Graham Moore, CC 2003
    Peter Herger, CC 2003
    Alden Young, CC 2004
    Nihal Godiwala, CC 2002
    Benjamin Joseph Bishop, GSAS 2001-2002
    Fabian Chrobog, CC 2002
    Michelle Kagan, BC 2004
    Madiha R. Tahir, BC 2003
    Katherine Logan M. McBride, BC 2004
    Jill Pasquarella, BC 2004
    Mary Catherine Ford, GS 2008
    Danielle Friedman [Visiting Student], Brown 2004
    Nadim El Gabbani, CC 2003
    Alfredo Zaragoza, GS 2004
    K. Cyrus Habib, CC 2003
    Wasim Salfiti, CC 2003
    Layal Bulbul, CC 2005

  15. Hi Xisnotx,
    Think of it this way: a woman or a child complains about abuse; she tells her parents, friends, and finally the administrators who are responsibile for her. The powers that be shut her down. Months later she decides to take a chance and testifies for a film. That film is made public when an administrator speaks about it at a public gathering, and a public firestorm ensures.
    A commission asked to investigate asks people to testify about the incident. They speak to the accused and accuser, and ask for all students who have relevant information to come forward. After finding the story of abuse credible, and ruling on it, suddently, a group of other students who did not come before the committee suddenly say “we saw nothing.”
    You wouldn’t buy it then, I don’t buy it now, and administrators who called the students in to a meeting and spoke with them found that these students simply rejected the findings of the committee. It turns out that they simply don’t remember much from the class. They can’t tell the day, but they can say that it was a heated class–meaning, they remember the tension but can’t (and didn’t when the had the chance) testify that abuse did not occur.
    That is why it is after-the-fact BS.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.

The reCAPTCHA verification period has expired. Please reload the page.

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.