Finally: Christian Arabs form their own Israeli political party
In a move that is probably long overdue due to the increasingly Islamist nature of Israel's Arab political parties,
Arab Christians have decided to form their own political party.
Bashara Shlayan, 58, a ship captain from Nazareth, founded the new party. In an interview with Israel Hayom,
he says he was motivated to enter politics not only because of the
rapid changes gripping the region, but also because the Arab political
parties in Israel predominantly serve the interests of Muslims and have a
communist platform.
“People see what is happening now in
Lebanon, Egypt and Syria. They understand where we are living. I tell
them, ‘For 65 years we have given to the Arab communist parties; 65
years and they have done nothing!’ Give me three years, I will manage
and solve their problems,” he says.
“Look at what the Arab parties have
done. Just talking nonsense about nothing but communism; [MK Dov] Khenin
and [MK Mohammad] Barakeh (Hadash/Communist Party), what have they done
for us? They want us to disappear and are not acting according to the
integrity of their country’s citizens,” Shlayan adds.
Further distinguishing himself from
his Muslim Arab neighbors, Shlayan says he is an “Arab Christian in
Israel who recognizes the land of Israel as belonging to the Jews.”
“Firstly we are completely Israeli, and then comes religion,” he says.
There is fierce opposition among
Muslims living in Israel to serve in the IDF, a position that in the
past influenced Christian Arabs to opt out. Though there is a draft in
Israel, the government does not require Christian or Muslim Arab
citizens to serve, due to possible conflicts of loyalty as family
members may reside in Lebanon, Syria or other Middle Eastern countries
still officially in a state of war with Israel.
Shlayan says he wants to change that,
and helped his nephew and son enlist in the IDF. Since they were the
trailblazers, that effort was a challenge.
“When I wanted my son to join the army
we decided to create a forum for Christian enlistment. We also invited
priests from the church to a conference we held in Nazareth Illit. One
of them is the Church patriarch, Father Gabriel Nadaf [who has drawn the
ire of Arab MKs recently for encouraging Christian Arab youth to join
the IDF], who preferred [our way] and said we were right.”
Today Shlayan’s nephew is a major in a combat unit.
Because he publicly backed enlistment
for Israel’s 130,000 Christian Arab citizens, Father Nadaf was “banned
from entering Nazareth’s Church of the Annunciation, and was threatened
with being fired from his position in Yafia. The tires of his car were
punctured and a rag with bloodstains was laid at his doorstep,” writes
the Times of Israel.
I wish them all the luck in the world.
Labels: Christians in Israel, identity politics, Israeli Arab, Politics
Coincidence? Obama lost in every state with a photo ID law
And you thought the Democrats opposed
voter identification laws because they prevent people who are entitled to vote from voting. Err....
Not exactly.
Curiously,
Obama lost in every state that requires a photo ID to be produced
before voting. A list of closely contested state elections with no voter
ID, which narrowly went to Obama include: Minnesota (10), Iowa (6),
Wisconsin (10), Nevada (6), Colorado (9), New Mexico (5) and
Pennsylvania (20).
And yes, that's enough electoral votes to change the result.
The picture at the top is an Israeli
teudat zehut (identification card) and yes, you must have one to vote in our elections.
Labels: identity politics, US elections
Lara Logan and the victimization rules
Have you all noticed that the news coverage of Lara Logan's
sexual assault rape is ignoring the perpetrators? Have you noticed that while radical Leftist Nir Rosen was (rightfully)
taken to the cleaners last week for his comments about Logan, we have heard nothing about the Egyptian perpetrators or the
misogynistic (women hating) society that is Egypt today? To understand why the coverage has taken that slant, you have to understand the
victimization rules. Caroline Glick explains.
Identity politics revolve around the narrative of victimization. For adherents to identity politics, the victim is not a person, but a member of a privileged victim group. That is, the status of victimhood is not determined by facts, but by membership in an identity group. Stories about victims are not dictated by facts. Victim stories are tailored to fit the victim. Facts, values and individual responsibility are all irrelevant.
In light of this, a person’s membership in specific victim groups is far more important than his behavior. And there is a clear pecking order of victimhood in identity politics.
Anti-American Third World national, religious and ethnic groups are at the top of the victim food chain. They out-victim everyone else.
After them come the Western victims: Racial minorities, women, homosexuals, children and animals.
Israelis, Jews, Americans, white males and rich people are the predetermined perpetrators. No matter how badly they are victimized, brave reporters will go to heroic lengths to ignore, underplay or explain away their suffering.
In cases when victim groups are attacked by victim groups – for instance when Iraqis were attacked by Saddam, or Palestinians are attacked by the PA, the media tend to ignore the story.
When members of Western victim groups are attacked by Third World victims, the story can be reported, but with as little mention of the identity of the victim-perpetrators as possible. So it was with coverage of Logan and the rest of the foreign reporters assaulted in Egypt. They were attacked by invisible attackers with no identities, no barbaric values, no moral responsibility, and no criminal culpability. CBS went so far as to blur the faces of the men who surrounded Logan in the moments before she was attacked.
When we understand the rules of reportage as dictated by adherents to identity politics, we understand why Rosen was excommunicated when he mocked Logan and not when he called for Israel’s destruction, condemned the commemoration of the September 11 attacks, or sided with the Taliban and the Iraqi insurgents killing Americans. In those cases, he followed the rules – preferring the cause of “victims” over the lives of “perpetrators.”
But when he mocked Logan, he crossed the line. He treated Logan as a perpetrator because he thought of her as an insufficiently anti-American reporter. He didn’t realize that when she was brutalized, she had slid into the victim category.
Identity politics are nothing more than socially acceptable bigotry. Those who practice it are racist bigots who have replaced liberal values that hold everyone to the same moral and criminal standards with illiberal values that judge people’s morality and criminality by the identity group with which they are most readily associated.
When we understand identity politics, we understand how it is that the wholesale assaults against foreign journalists have received so little analysis. Lara Logan and the other hundred reporters attacked in Tahrir Square are real victims, not because of who they are, but because of what happened to them. The Egyptians who attacked them are real criminals, not because of who they are, but because of what they did.
But until reporters are willing to admit this – that is, until they dump their ideological attachment to identity politics in favor of the truth – news consumers worldwide will continue to receive news reports that obfuscate more than they tell us about the world we live in.
I'd love to see reporters drop their ideological attachment to identity politics. Unfortunately, I doubt their employers will let them do so. But I'd love to see Lara Logan lead the way.
Read it all.
Labels: Egypt, identity politics, Lara Logan, media bias, Tahrir Square
