Dubai Forums Dubai Discussions Dubai Politics Talk

From Haaretz yesterday:

"This is a sad day for the citizens of Israel, when racism receives legitimization," said Ran Cohen, the Director of the Migrant Refugee & Non-Status Division of the organization Doctors for Human Rights.
..
Meretz MK Ilan Gil'on said that "again, we are witness to racist incitement on the part of the rabbis.

Tel Aviv Rabbis: Renting apartments to foreign workers violates Jewish law
By Dana Weiler-Polak

Twenty-five rabbis from Tel Aviv have signed an edict forbidding the rental of apartments to "infiltrators" and illegal foreign workers.

In a public announcement, the rabbis said that "in the wake of the severe pressure that the neighborhoods of south Tel Aviv face and their abandonment by the government, that begins with the Israeli-Egyptian border and ends with the lawlessness and violence that is taking over south Tel Aviv, the residents of the neighborhoods have decided that the present situation cannot continue".

The authors of a petition on the subject added that "they will not let the neighborhoods in which they grew up to turn into Sudanese neighborhoods, something that has already happened to the Neve Sha'anan neighborhood. After many attempts using acceptable legal means, the residents decided to have the rabbis sign an 'Edict Forbidding the Rental of Apartments to Infiltrators,' and hope that this will halt the deterioration of the
neighborhoods."

An announcement that activists intend to post on bulletin boards around the city states that "we, the undersigned, neighborhood rabbis and synagogue rabbis, hereby warn the public of the religious prohibitions and the foreseeable dangers that would result from renting apartments to these people." The rabbis added that "may the efforts of those that toil to defend the Jewish character of the City of Tel Aviv be strengthened."

"This is a sad day for the citizens of Israel, when racism receives legitimization," said Ran Cohen, the Director of the Migrant Refugee & Non-Status Division of the organization Doctors for Human Rights. "We call upon citizens to fiercely reject this petition and courageously stand in opposition to this display of fear and xenophobia that is gaining traction within our society."

Meretz MK Ilan Gil'on said that "again, we are witness to racist incitement on the part of the rabbis. The same rabbis that should be preaching love of Israel and all of humanity are attempting to incite hatred and arouse fear among Israeli society. The Attorney General must investigate to find out if these rabbis are on the government payroll."

http://www.haaretz.com/news/national/te ... w-1.300815

An interesting comment posted on loonwatch:

What seems strange about this series ”What if they were Muslim?” is the underlying assumption that crimes committed by non-Muslims somehow get less attention than those done by Muslims. Well, it very much depends on the context which is entirely ignored at this site. To take one example, the recent shooting rampage by Raoul Moat certainly featured on British newc channels in Britain much more than the bombings in Kampala. Why was this? Not because of any sort of personal bias against Mr. Moat, it’s just that the shooting and the aftermath are uncommon occurrences in Britain, and it was a domestic issue. Indeed, the 7/7 bombings received just as much coverage, but not because of some perceived bias against Muslims.

The second faulty assumption in this series is that religious motivation is never ascribed to non-Muslims, but it clearly is in the news item mentioned above. And it’s not being ignored by the media: it’s openly discussed in Ha’aretz.

Finally, this series is simply playing tu quoque. As an analogy, I could ask the Israeli human-rights group ”Why don’t you write reports documenting human-rights abuses in Tibet, Burma etc.?”. That would be entirely fallacious, because that’s not the organization’s purpose, and the focus of its activities in no way implies endorsement or apathy towards human-rights abuses committed elsewhere. Similarly, if you’re wondering why Jihad Watch doesn’t mention the news item above or others, it’s because that’s not the purpose of the site”: it documents instances of jihad violence and Islamic supremacism. And for the record, Spencer has on repeated occasions stressed that he does not believe Muslims have or have ever had a monopoly on evil, only that the strand of jihad violence and Islamic supremacism is quite active throughout much of the world today.

http://www.loonwatch.com/2010/07/tel-av ... re-muslim/

*Expects loon obfuscation*

No obfuscation here.

Just an observation that loons are trying to divert attention from the racist acts in Israel and focus on the commentary on the racism in Israel.

The allegation that the 'what if they were muslim' is actually a 'tu quoque' argument is laughable - for no one on Loonwatch excuses terrorist or criminal acts when they point out that loons exaggerate coverage where Muslims are concerned. In fact the commentator makes the point that Haaretz is discussing this racism openly doesn't really help the loon argument. The fact is often made that there is much more criticism and discussion of Israeli actions WITHIN Israel than in media reports orginating in the West. The series highlights loon exaggerations when it comes to Muslims is not applied to others.

Edit - in fact, this comment from Loonwatch on another 'what if they were Muslim' articles makes the point very well:

Daniel Says:
July 14th, 2010 at 5:27 pm

@Hooper, the point of these articles is not to say “someone else did it, therefore it makes it ok.”. That would be the tu quoque fallacy. Rather, it demonstrates that the media often has a bias that, when something bad is done by a Muslim or by a government in a Muslim-majority state, all of Islam is often blamed for this.

Should one condemn all Orthodox Christians as intolerant because of this incident? Absolutely not. But often all Muslims are shown as intolerant when SOME decide to something wacky like this. That is a double standard.

However, great to see a Spencer fanbois post on Loonwatch - perhaps he/she has more cojhones than Spencer who is still in hiding.

Now, this bit from the fanbois raises an interesting point:

Spencer has on repeated occasions stressed that he does not believe Muslims have or have ever had a monopoly on evil, only that the strand of jihad violence and Islamic supremacism is quite active throughout much of the world today.

Does this mean that Spencer disagrees with you:

event horizon wrote:Peace with Islam and Muslims is impossible. The only time Muslims seek peace is when they need to reload.

Are you more extreme than your Guru?


Cheers,
Shafique

Actually, there are several arguments Muslims and their ilk make.

Two or three are mentioned by the poster I quoted and I'll reiterate his clearest points:

1) Islamic terrorism receives more coverage than other terrorist attacks or forms of violence.

2) Religious motivation is only ascribed to violent individuals when they are Muslims



Muslims have long whined about receiving disproportionate coverage by the media for attacks carried out by Islamists. But as the poster explained; it's context, stupid.

The shooting rampage carried out by that White, non-Muslim British citizen several weeks ago highlights the fact that the media does not provide more coverage to acts of violence carried out by non-Muslims.

The British media covered the story much more than it covered the Ugandan bombings. Seeing how the story happened in Britain, I doubt very many non-Muslims claimed that the media was providing disproportionate coverage to the shooting rampage when there were a lot of other killings going on around the world at the time. It was just common sense.

Common sense was/is in short supply for loons who claimed the 7/7 bombings were given too much attention by the media and politicians. Surely the fact that the attack was carried out in their own country never dawned on these loons, right? Right.

I could also add that no Muslim made a stink about disproportionate media coverage of the shooting rampage and said the Ugandan bombings received too little. Hypocrisy anyone?

The poster's second argument also is worth repeating, since you make the same claim. In this article and other articles of Jewish extremists, religion is often mentioned.

In fact, I would say that the religion of Jewish or Christian religious (and the media's link of religion to extremism when it comes to Christianity or Judaism) extremists is mentioned more often than it is for Muslim extremists. If you're following along on Robert Spencer's own 'series', he often quotes articles from international and local news sources where the religion, let alone any indication that the arrested/accused/charged are religious extremists, is often ignored by various reporters and journalists.....if they are Muslims.

They are identified as 'men' who have 'grievances', who may be related somehow (how?), etc. That's not journalism. That's PC pandering.

The fact is often made that there is much more criticism and discussion of Israeli actions WITHIN Israel than in media reports orginating in the West.

You can't speak for others because I have not seen this as a 'fact'. Most loons out there claim that Israel's media is biased against Islam and Muslims. There is no distinction made between Israeli coverage of current events and the coverage that American or Western media provides.

The series highlights loon exaggerations when it comes to Muslims is not applied to others.

Ok, let's see these articles from the media where the media exaggerates Muslim terrorism, blah blah blah.

Surely you aren't claiming that this whole series is over what peeps on their blogs say about current events.......

I mean, that would sound a bit juvenile. A lot of loons out there have some rather odd beliefs. But I'm not going to start a website and devote entire 'series' to it.

LoL!

I searched in vain for a comment about the Racism in Tel Aviv or an answer to the question whether eh is more extreme than his Guru, Bob 'the huckster' Spencer.

As the guys at Loonwatch have already clarified what their stance is, eh's ramblings seem to be nothing more than a lame attempt at diversion.

Cheers,
Shafique