The anti- brigade are irritated by the good record of Israel with regard to the Environment and Gay Rights. They are furious that the massacres in Syria are removing focus from their obsession on the Palestinians.
In an effort to denigrate Israel, we are seeing the terms Greenwashing, Pinkwashing and Assadwashing being promoted among the circles of obsessives.
Richard Landes has an excellent expose of it all here where he fisks an anti letter accusing him of Assadwashing.
One accusation and response is the following:
To them (ie Israel supporters), injustice anywhere is not a threat to justice everywhere, but a way to steer attention away from Israel’s behavior.
How about a way to put Israel’s behavior in context? in the 20 years from 1989-2009, for example, some 10,000 people were killed in the Arab-Israeli conflict. In the same time unbridled wars killed some 4-6 million (!) people in the Democratic Republic of Congo.
If you just reverse the labels, you have a comparison of the “media footprint” of these two conflicts, with huge attention to the Arab-Israeli conflict and virtually nothing to the Congo. Challenging that grotesque (and ultimately racist) obsession with Israel and lack of concern for African dead at the hands of Africans, apparently makes Jamil indignant.
Would it not be appropriate for all human rights activists who are not victims of the Human Rights Complex, who are not tempted by a kind of Judeophobia in which anyone injured by a Jew/Israeli is infinintely more important than someone killed by a “person of color,” to reconsider priorities? All I hear from Jabril is “don’t let Israel off the hook by looking at anything else.”
and this comment and response
Questions directed at supporters of Palestinian self-determination regarding what they are “doing about Syria” are irrelevant as these are rarely asked of activists involved in other causes, and are intended not to shed light upon the Syrians’ struggle, but to whitewash Israeli criminality.
Classic demopathic, face-saving move: accuse your accuser of hypocrisy. And yet, does that mean that Jamil will throw the Syrians under the bus (their suffering is irrelevant) just so Israel can’t get off the hook? In a world with limited time and devastating crises, human rights activists should indeed consider triage.
I think it’s entirely appropriate to say to any “human rights activist”: what are your priorities? Should you be focusing so much effort on x, when y is so much more disastrous a situation? A fortiori, should we not be allowed to question the bona fides of “human rights activists” who devote their heart and soul to the cause of people who stage humanitarian crises and spread lethal narratives?
.. a separate good response is as follows