Commentary

Praise for anti-Zionism

POSTED AT 10:39 PM ON Oct. 27, 2008 | PRINT | Email | SHARE | COMMENTS (208)

EDITOR'S NOTE:
We have received many comments regarding Tuesday’s column “Praise for anti-Zionism,” including several accusations of racism and bigotry.

The column, which intended to advance the debate on U.S.-Israeli policy, was taken by some to be inflammatory and hurtful.

Our columnist’s goal was not to promote or to accept anti-Semitism in any way, and we published it to encourage debate.

The IDS stands against all racism, which we regret some felt we displayed. Likewise, we oppose the racism that was directed against our columnist and various other ethnic groups in response to the column in letters, online comments and phone calls.

We apologize that anyone felt offended or attacked.

The goal of the opinion section is to create a dialogue and we are always happy to open the doors to you, our readers. We hope that you will submit all your letters and requests for guest columns to letters@idsnews.com.

Thank you for everyone’s constructive feedback.


---

What if the United States elects an anti-Zionist president?

That’s exactly what Rev. Jesse Jackson suggested when he said Barack Obama would rid the United States of “Zionist” control if elected.

In response to these falsities, Obama spokesperson Wendy Morigi said, “Rev. Jesse Jackson Sr. is not an advisor to the Obama campaign and is therefore in no position to interpret or share Barack Obama’s views on Israel and foreign policy.” She went on to stress Obama’s loyalty to Israel. Obama quickly threw Jackson under the bus, just like he did to his pastor of more than 20 years, Rev. Jeremiah Wright.

What makes everyone afraid to be anti-Zionist? The Israeli lobby.

Obama probably looks to Nobel Peace Prize-winner President Jimmy Carter as an example of what not to do. When Jimmy Carter released his book “Palestine: Peace Not Apartheid,” the Israeli lobby unfairly attacked him using their “finely honed techniques of defamation, slander and intimidation.”

Since then, intellectual pedants like Alan Dershowitz vociferously attacked Carter as “shallow and superficial.” Remember, this is the man who defended Eliot Spitzer’s involvement in prostitution. Even more embarrassing than being attacked by the crazed Dershowitz, the Democratic Party sidelined Carter at the 2008 Democratic National Convention.

There’s no confirmed proof that Democrats shunned Carter because of his criticism of Israel’s occupation of the West Bank and Gaza Strip, but speculation abounds. Carter can be written off thanks to the Israeli lobby.

But what if a future president is anti-Zionist? Would that be so wrong? Not at all.
Israel wastes American tax dollars and support. Between 1949 and Nov. 1, 1997, Israel cost U.S. taxpayers a total of $134,791,507,200, according to the Washington Report on Middle East Affairs. That is a total benefit of $14,630 per Israeli!

In short, the U.S. fiscally supported Israel’s oppressive and corrupt policies of occupation and colonization. Even former speaker of the Israeli Knesset, Avraham Burg, said, “The Israeli nation today rests on a scaffolding of corruption and on foundations of oppression and injustice.”

As if to confirm this statement, the current Israeli Prime Minister, Ehud Olmert, will step down because of corruption charges. One cannot deny Israel’s violent conquest of the Palestinian territories, reticent of South African apartheid.

Israeli leaders say Israel has no soul and “to define the State of Israel as a Jewish state is the key to its end. A Jewish state is explosive. It’s dynamite.”

Why should America support a corrupt and pernicious country, especially after its own leaders deride its founding principals? It should not.

America desperately needs an anti-Zionist president. An anti-Zionist president would save America’s moral soul and taxpayer dollars. Anyway, if Jews really are God’s chosen people, then the Jewish state of Israel does not need American support. Israel has a monopoly on God. Who would go against Him?

Unfortunately, neither Obama nor McCain has the chutzpah to be anti-Zionist. But even if America has an anti-Zionist president, the Israeli lobby will always have a representative in Sen. Joseph Lieberman, who seems to represent Tel Aviv more than Connecticut.

Editor’s Note: “to define the State of Israel as a Jewish state is the key to its end. A Jewish state is explosive. It’s dynamite.” can be attributed to former speaker of the Israeli Knesset, Avraham Burg, who is mentioned earlier in the column. Burg, when speaking on what he thought were the mistakes of Zionism, also said “Israeliness has only body; it doesn’t have soul.”

PRINT | Email | SHARE | COMMENTS (208)





Name: *
Email: *
E-mail address will not be published.
Comments:
Verify image: Security Text
  *
 
 
All Comments  (208)

Posted by allcaps at 3:31 AM on Mar 06, 2009 | Report this comment

Well, while it is obvious that some of the things which were said in this article are inflammatory, I think we could all use some perspective. The idea that The author states a hypothetical situation, and then explores what the American people would gain from that situation. While I have problems with some of the characterizations and placement of his quotes and facts, it is really not possible to blame him for the existence of said quotes and facts. Certainly there could have been a different slant to this article, which would have made it less offensive to some, but it is the author's prerogative to decide what message he wants to send. Blaming him for supporting his viewpoint by attacking the opposition's basis for support is not the way to have a reasoned conversation. And while I know this is not going to change anybody's minds about the author or IU, the sort of research and writing which have been produced in this article are exactly what our universities are supposed to produce: thoughtful, reasoned looks at issues.

Posted by Ryan at 7:26 PM on Feb 02, 2009 | Report this comment

I have lots of Jewish friends, and I am certainly not antisemitic. That being said, when you take religion out of it, the idea of a strictly "Jewish state" is not something the US should be supporting. Yes, the atrocities of the Nazis were terrible, but the creation of Israel after world war II was not the correct course of action to make up for the holocaust. Just as the color of your skin shouldn't matter, religion should not be an issue in the 21st century. Should the US government support the creation of an all African-American state? No.

Posted by Get a clue at 3:30 PM on Jan 05, 2009 | Report this comment

HAHAHA Druid, you are an idiot. Israel is a liberal democracy just like the United States. Why do you think we are allies? And there being a jewish state, well there isn't vatican city, or many, many, many Islamic run countries. Those countries like Iran for instance run their government by Islamic law, however, Israel doesn't run its government by Jewish law. That is a big difference. Also, other ethnicities and religions are free to live in Israel and practice religion there. It is JUST a homeland for all jews that President Truman decided to help the jews achieve after the jews were almost slaughtered in the Holocaust. Jewish people (Israel) have done so much for this world with inventions, cures, currencies, forms of government, defense systems, counter-terrorism, etc. with only 12 million total people. How did the jewish people get so much influence then in this world? It is because every time a world power tries to take out the jews, they get defeated, all in the last 2600 years. Jewish people just want to live in peace, yet because the very existence of Israel is there, so many people can't handle it. Israel needs to stay alive because of that. People can't handle the fact that Israel is so successful and shares the same ideology as this great country (the USA). Praise Israel, Praise the USA, and condemn all of those who promote terrorism like Hamas, Hezbollah, Islamic Republic of Iran, etc.

Posted by Druid at 8:31 AM on Dec 28, 2008 | Report this comment

Zionism is in itself racist. Israel is a racist state. Anybody who supports Zionism and Israel is supporting a racist ideology. Suppose we had a country who claims to be the Aryan State. Does anyone think for a moment that that state would be tolerated yet we have the Zionist Israel who actively seek to have a country for nothing but jews. This seems to be a double standard. And yes, the Zionist need to be driven from power in this country. They have far too much influence. They control our foreign policy to the point of being detrimental to the interest of the US to favor that of Israel. It needs to be stopped. People need to wake up to realities in this country and turn off the TVs.

Posted by bucca at 6:56 AM on Dec 26, 2008 | Report this comment

IDS editorial board is hardly representative of the student body. There are at least 4 jews: Schwimmer, Chernesky, Zaslow,Fleischman. 5 Wells scholars : Ames, Chapman,Schwimmer, Wachtel and Wallace. No Muslims, no blacks, no Asians. One Indian and one gay thrown in the mix for diversity.

Posted by Read More Carefully at 9:53 PM on Dec 11, 2008 | Report this comment

So, you're stereotyping and making gross generalizations about Muslims as he does about Jews. So, it's alright to be bigoted toward one religious group but not another... That's a bit hypocritical.

Posted by Yahya is a Fraud at 4:42 PM on Dec 11, 2008 | Report this comment

I say his muslim faith because that is how he identified himself to me. That is why I called hime a fraud. Because in his article he says he is atheist, but in a personal email that I wrote to him, he referred to his "muslim faith" in his responce to my personal email. Now we can see why he is an anti-zionist. Now, don't everyone jump on my case for saying that. Yes, I know there are anti-zionists that aren't muslim, but lets speak in majorities here people.

Posted by Read More Carefully at 2:59 AM on Dec 11, 2008 | Report this comment

Where did I say it wasn't hateful? Yes, that's right, I didn't say that. In fact, I was actually arguing that it was hateful toward MANY MORE people. Contrary to what you suggest, I did not argue that it wasn't a mean-spirited and even hateful editorial. Your misunderstanding and/or fabrication of that is what's preposterous.

Posted by believer at 10:17 PM on Dec 08, 2008 | Report this comment

So just because he's mean to everyone, it's not hateful???!! that's preposterous~

Posted by Read More Carefully at 9:20 PM on Dec 08, 2008 | Report this comment

Chaudhry self-identifies as an atheist in the article, so it's interesting that you say "his Muslim faith." He may have been a Muslim, but he makes it pretty clear in his editorial that he is an atheist or "anti-theist," as he puts it, now. Of course, if this is meant to imply that somehow that his "Muslimness" (sic) is to blame for his idiocy, then one is being as bigoted as Chaudhry. The fact that many Jewish people were offended by his "anti-theist" article doesn't make it anti-Semitic. I know many people who belong to other religions who also did not like, and many who took offense, at this editorial. It was anti-religion and anti-religious people, all people and all religions.

Posted by Breathe Deep at 5:8 PM on Dec 08, 2008 | Report this comment

I think everyone just needs to calm down now, the semester is almost over and management at the IDS will change. Let's hope they just do a better job in the future.

Posted by rationalist at 3:3 PM on Dec 08, 2008 | Report this comment

If he wrote a column against all religion, then how can he be anti-semitc? He's simply anti-religion.

Posted by Yahya is a Fraud at 10:40 AM on Dec 08, 2008 | Report this comment

To Read more Carefully, Actually, I sent this article to about 250 jewish people in my community, and every one of them said how awful this was and they were completely outraged. Do all jews think alike? Absolutely not, but I would be willing to bet that 9.5 out of every 10 jews was extemely offended by this article. In my congregation, it was 100%. Also, Yahya did talk about in that artcle how people shouldn't believe in religion. However, I find it pretty funny in an email that I wrote to Yahya after this article was written, that he talked in pretty good detail about his Muslim faith. This guy is a hypocrite. It is a shame that the once #1 ranked journalism school in the country is now accepting people like this kid. Sad!!!!

Posted by Read More Carefully at 8:21 PM on Dec 05, 2008 | Report this comment

Actually, his other editorial was about all religions, not just Judaism. He attacked all those who follow a religion. You hope his next 10 professors "are Jews?" Do all "Jews" behave in the same way? I don't think so. No 10 people from any group do. Ridiculous.

Posted by Read-it at 8:45 AM on Dec 05, 2008 | Report this comment

TIME FOR ANOTHER REMINDER!!!The IDS faculty is responsible for publishing this hate speech!! Where is the oversight, the guidance, the advisory role? If this student paper prints hostile hate speech what happens in the dorms between Jewish students and those like Chaudrhy? Do not let this hate indoctrinated student author be the catalyst for any debate on Israel/Zionism/anti-Zionism.Focus on the real problem here, that a big ten award winning student paper has CHOSEN to give a platform to him. Weeks after he published this the IDS gave him another bite at the apple allowing him again to publish his views on the Jewish religion. DEMAND A CHANGE IN FACULTY LEADERSHIP AT THE IDS FROM THE TOP DOWN!! p.s. Chaudrhy, I hope your next 10 professors are all Jews, and I hope this article follows you to every job you ever apply for. I for one will do my best to see to it that your article and you are not separated.

Posted by Jak at 8:16 PM on Dec 03, 2008 | Report this comment

To make your ad hominems work, you have to twist what I wrote in order for your inference to even make sense. As is clear to any reasonable person, I was providing examples of different groups. I could have easily replaced "African-American" with Caucasian or East Asian or South Asian or Native American, etc. Then you ask, with the hopes of instilling the idea in readers' minds, that I am "racist." Of course, it's only in your delusions that anything I wrote was racist. Clearly I was not arguing that African-Americans were a religious group, I was providing examples of different groups of people or communal groups (in the general sense). Hooked on Phonix may be for you. As for "unreliable" sources, you haven't actually countered any of the facts/figures I've used in previous posts. All you've done is bitch and moan that I don't agree with you. You've also said that the "facts" are important to you, as long as you agree with someone's argument, however weak. To quote you: "useless facts." That tells us all we need to know about you. Never did I say that I want Israel "to be gone." You lied about that. Nor have I ever stated "my ideology." Of course, you lying is not a surprise, as you clearly state your real views; you're not just interested in the safety of Israel, which is the right of all peoples, you are a supremacist. I did go to dictionary.com, but didn't find "hypocrit" as it is spelled with an "e". Far be it from me to give you lessons in "gramar" (sic) or question the "bioligical" (sic) weapons. After reading your nonsense, it's easier to understand how people can be sheep who believe whatever they are told to believe.

Posted by Right on RIP at 4:23 PM on Dec 03, 2008 | Report this comment

The last time I checked, there was no single "Jewish" (or "Christian," "Muslim," "African-American," etc.) opinion, as different people hold different beliefs, regardless of whether or not they share a religion or race or ethnic group. Oh my God, did the almight Jak just make an error, I thought only zionists did that. Were you inferring that African Americans are a religion and not a race, or were you inferring that Jewish, Muslim, and Christian are races and not religions. Interesting how you grouped three religions together and then African Americans. Whoops, are you racist? Did you make an error? Was there anything wrong gramatically? Tell me about the African Americans 200 years ago, and how they were a religion first. Is that what you are going to say? Are you going to pull out some fact from an unreliable source and cite it here? Uh oh, Jak made a boo boo. Too bad. Hypocrit!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Posted by Right on RIP at 4:3 PM on Dec 03, 2008 | Report this comment

HAHAHAHAHAAHAHA, you did it again! Stop with these useless facts. Blah, Blah, Blah, thank you for all your history lessons. I was saying when one has a gramatical error or states something about history that isn't true, but they happen to be arguing the same points as you, you decide not to point out their inaccuracies. You only point out inaccuracies of people who are arguing for the state of Israel or against your ideologies, so you are the hypocrite. By hypocrite, I mean, you will point out a gramatical error, A FRIEKING GRAMATICAL ERROR (as if that is really that important, get a life) for someone arguing a different point than you, but you won't do it for someone arguing the same points as you. Go to dicionary.com, look up the word hypocrit in since you love using that word so much, and you will see the name JAK next to it. Sorry, Jak, you have to accept it. Israel isn't going anywhere. They are a nuclear armed country, so it doesn't matter how many countries want Israel gone, because if these countries try it, well then we might see the end of the world as we know it. It is useless for people like you to argue, because it just simply won't happen anymore. The world has allowed Israel's weaponry power to become too powerful for their ever to be a inkling that they would give the land back to the Palestinians. Just won't happen. Argue your falsehoods and gramatical errors all you want, but your idealogy won't come to fruition ever, because of Israel's nuclear and bioligical weapon power. But you can always go help the Palestinians throw rocks if you want. It does a whole lot. Peace out, I hope you have fun arguing for the rest of your life, maybe you should try to enjoy some things.

Posted by Jak at 2:47 PM on Dec 03, 2008 | Report this comment

So, when have you challenged those you seem to agree with? Hmmmmmmmmmmmmmm? I wonder why you haven't? Yet you criticize others for not doing what you yourself don't do. Hypocrisy.

Posted by Jak at 2:46 PM on Dec 03, 2008 | Report this comment

Way wrong? Clearly you define "wrong" as not agreeing with you. I'm pretty sure those without blinders can see that.

Posted by Jak at 2:43 PM on Dec 03, 2008 | Report this comment

No, I don't take the posts personally. Interestingly, you seem to have the magical ability to "know" things about people you don't know and have never met. Ridiculous. Again, you consider arguments built on falsehoods to be "knit-picking," which tells us how rigorous (or non) your standards are.You also conflate the Jewish people with the nation-state of Israel and Zionism as a nationalist identity. Unfortunately for you, the two are not synonymous. One can be Jewish and not be Israeli, and, judging from the number of Arab Israelis, one can be Israeli and not Jewish, despite the fact that the state's official ideology is that it is the "Jewish state." Your not-so-subtle ad hominems are also nice. I am far from angry, though you seem to be in fits that someone actually points out the inaccuracies and falsehoods you seem to hold so dear. Perhaps reality and the truth are too much for you to handle. As you state it, you are upset that I only "pick on" "your side" and not the other. You are willing to overlook or excuse arguments constructed on inaccuracies. Your standards (or lack of them) are pretty clear. The last time I checked, there was no single "Jewish" (or "Christian," "Muslim," "African-American," etc.) opinion, as different people hold different beliefs, regardless of whether or not they share a religion or race or ethnic group. As I said before, there is no way anyone here can tell what group others come from, as it is not possible to discern such information unless they self-identity, which the majority of posters have not. Perhaps you think certain groups write in a particular way, which is ridiculous.

Posted by Right on RIP at 2:28 PM on Dec 03, 2008 | Report this comment

I agree with the person who wrote a message for Jak. If you go back and look at his messages, you will see that he does indeed take them personally. Jak you are definitely taking some of these messages personally. I feel you get, like, mad when you read something you don't agree with. Like the other guy said, go back and read what you have written and you will see that you sound angered when responding. And you take these messages personally!!! Also, I think that the guy that wrote that message for you was pointing out that all the facts that you claim baseless are coming from people who are arguing for Jews and Israel. That is why he probably thought you are jumping all over the jews. I have read every single one of your posts, and every single time you knit pick against people writing messages in favor of Israel and Jews. You never once pointed out anything erroneous to people who were arguing for anti-zionism. Hmmmmmmmmmm, I wonder why? You did say that the article was poorly written, but thats about it. I feel bad for your angry little heart. You don't have to make everything about you and then try to flip-flop it. Sorry man, something is way wrong in what you are doing here. And I am pretty sure everyone can see it.

Posted by Jak (Oh Alive) at 1:6 AM on Dec 03, 2008 | Report this comment

"You are a prime example of everything that is wrong with people in today's society. People are posting on this message board to prove a point, yet you find ways to discredit a small fact whether it is academic or gramatical..." Actually, some of the "facts" that have been used to support arguments have been pretty big, not small. It's interesting that you seem to think an argument based on falsehoods is strong. You call for "fairness" and then pepper your reply with ad hominems, like a hypocrite.

Posted by Jak (Very much alive) at 1:0 AM on Dec 03, 2008 | Report this comment

Interesting advice, for sure. It does, however, apply to others as well. Points built on erroneous "facts" are not solid points at all. As for being ideological, it's telling that you presume those who don't see things as you do are the ones being "ideological" and "not seeing the larger point." I am not the author of this article (nice ad hominem, though) and, in fact, I found the op-ed to be poorly written and argued, among other things. As for knowing which posters are Jewish, there is no way to know who is what ethnic, racial, or religious group unless they self-identify. As for being "argumentative," I have simply pointed out erroneous "facts," inconsistencies, and gross generalizations contained with some previous posts. You speak about facts and errors of fact as if they aren't important. An argument built on inaccurate information is a weak argument. As for being "sure," how is this possible when you don't know the person? As for looking in the mirror, you should do it yourself as well, to see that those who accuse others of bias usually have bias themselves. You ask me to be more "fair" in my readings, and then don't give me the same courtesy. Follow your own advice.

Posted by For Jak: RIP, im sorry at 4:50 PM on Dec 02, 2008 | Report this comment

Jak You take everything to heart. You look for the one piece of information in one of these posts that may be too broad and pounce on it. You are a prime example of everything that is wrong with people in today's society. People are posting on this message board to prove a point, yet you find ways to discredit a small fact whether it is academic or gramatical, it seems not to matter to you. When the guy or girl that wrote, "all the terrorism stems from the middle east," I am sure he/she was speaking out of a majority opinion (lots of terrorism is in the middle east) or passion. Yet you pounce on it because the poster said "all" instead of "most" or "some." I am sure he/she isn't so naive to think that the middle east is the only grounds terrorism comes from. It is sad that people are posting on this board trying to defend Judaism and Israel, and no matter what the point is, you somehow find a way to discredit it. One might believe that maybe you are the author of this article, or just a hate-filled person who has nothing better to do than wait for jews to post on this message board and try and bring them down. How dare you jump on this person's case for being a little depressed about the fact that their good friend was killed in this great tragedy in India. Maybe you should be a little more understanding when reading these. The person maybe made a mistake when writing that, but don't you think a "sorry about your friend" would have been a nice thing to say to this person rather than pouncing on him/her. Do you not have any respect?

Posted by For Jak: RIP, im sorry at 4:49 PM on Dec 02, 2008 | Report this comment

I truly hope that you take a look at yourself in the mirror and realize that you are just an argumentative person that can't see what people are trying to get across when they post on this message board. It seems like you are a smart person, yet your biases don't allow you to see the overall picture of what these posters are trying to say. Now, I am sure you will respond to this trying to discredit what I am saying, just like you have previously on this board. But if you truly read the words that I am saying to you, maybe, just maybe you will realize that you don't always have to be so argumentative, especially when trying to just pick one point out of every post to discredit it. I really hope you go back and read all your posts, and maybe, if you are as smart as I think you are, you might learn something about yourself.

Posted by Jak at 2:54 PM on Dec 02, 2008 | Report this comment

"All" the terrorism in the world? What about the IRA? Tamil Tigers? Narco-terrorism in South America, Europe, and Russia? This claim is demonstrably false. As for the claim that one group of people is "more" peaceful than another, this is also, as history shows, false. No one group has a monopoly on suffering and being the daily victim of violence. To claim so is what is ridiculous, as well as demonstrably false.

Posted by RIP Rabbi at 12:44 PM on Dec 01, 2008 | Report this comment

The fact of the matter is that all the terrorism in this world stems from Muslim militant groups. Israel targets other countries' military, while these militant groups target innocent civilians. There is a difference people. I happened to have known the Rabbi that was killed in the tragedy in India by once again, a Muslim militant group. This Rabbi was a good man, with a wife and kids. He vowed to an oath of poverty to help with other struggling families. He moved to India to help jews in India. He even employed and helped many others that weren't of the jewish faith. This was a great man, who was killed for absolutely no reason at all. You guys argue all you want, but jewish people are targeted every single day, and there is nothing that you can say that would make any jew or any realistic person believe anything else. People, there are 12 million of us left in the entire world, so regardless of what you write on this board or what is said within the political world, there is never going to be a day where we don't fight for our right to live in peace and fight for our right to have a homeland. Again, it doesn't really matter what you all say, because you are just like all the rest of them, except you just don't act out your thoughts. Jews are peaceful people with great accomplishments to share with the rest of the world, but it is sad that these Muslim militant groups can't see that, just like the rest of you. Maybe you guys would be singing a different tune, like we are, if you have seen what I have seen in my life. Like my family getting marched into gas chambers, or hate crime, or a beloved, innocent Rabbi getting killed in India just because he is Jewish. You guys are all rediculous, you all even have the audacity to continue to say these things just a couple days after this tragedy in India. JEWISH PEOPLE WERE JUST TARGETED, AND YET YOU STILL SAY THIS STUFF. TRULY REMARKABLE.

Posted by YOU at 11:47 PM on Nov 27, 2008 | Report this comment

How do you know what did or did not happen? Fox News reports the news "as it is", with no bias? Yeah, right. Neither do the other major cable networks. And it's "God/G-d" with a capital "G."

Posted by b at 10:6 PM on Nov 27, 2008 | Report this comment

The recent terrorist attacks in India... "The gunmen were well-prepared, even carrying large bags of almonds to keep up their energy during the fight. Their main targets appeared to be Americans, Britons and Jews" http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,458524,00.html The terrorists don't ask these Jews whether they are pro, or anti-zionist...Always has been always will be about being Jewish...plain and simple....I'm sure I will be discredited for using fox news as my source...g-d forbid somebody reports the news as it is....

Posted by B is not Done at 9:34 PM on Nov 26, 2008 | Report this comment

The propagandists are "B" and "Good find B," since it is they who regurgitate the same tired old talking points, and who are incapable of debating any of the issues, except with more talking points, which they don't even seem to fully understand themselves.

Posted by Jak at 9:30 PM on Nov 26, 2008 | Report this comment

Get Out of Here, your "history" of the June 1967 war is incorrect. "Thousands" of Israelis were not killed in that war. The Israelis suffered approximately 800 killed and 2,500 wounded. Additionally, it was the Israeli military that rolled into Egyptian, Syrian, and Jordanian territory and not the other way around. The U.S. did resupply the Israeli army in 1973, mostly because it did not want to see American weaponry, which Israel was using, be defeated by Soviet weaponry, which the Syrian and Egyptians were using. The Syrians and Egyptians did attack Israeli military forces in 1973, but inside their own territory, territory that was occupied by Israel in 1967.

Posted by Good find B at 2:51 PM on Nov 26, 2008 | Report this comment

Good find B. Don't worry, after reading the posts on this board, I am pretty sure that these a-holes will find some way to discredit this medical breakthrough. Or Yahya will write some article how the jews stole this invention from the Palestinians, or some other Propoganda. I am just waiting for it. Let's hear the discrediting!!!!

Posted by B at 1:40 PM on Nov 26, 2008 | Report this comment

I Zionist state contributes nothing to the world...http://www.jpost.com/servlet/Satellite?cid=1226404836338&pagename=JPost%2FJPArticle%2FShowFull

Posted by Get out of here at 12:30 PM on Nov 26, 2008 | Report this comment

Yes, nonsense, you proved my point in the second to last sentence you wrote, "If they don't feel that their own countries can or are willing to do so, they can move to Israel." That is my whole point. If a 2nd Holocaust were to break out in the USA, Russia, Germany, etc., then all jews would be able to go to Israel to escape it. That is my whole point to why Israel is so important to jews. If a Holocaust broke out in a country and there was no Israel, where am I going to go? And my opinion on the US invovement in the 2nd world war was not shallow, as they waited way too long. Once they realized that Hitler practically took over all of Europe, then they decided it was ok to go into Europe. That is what I was stressing earlier as politics get in the way of acting immediately. Also, Israel would never, never, never take more than one day if there was a Holocaust going on, so when you say that Israel is just as political, well maybe, but not when it comes to killing jews. You are arguing a point of politics that would never come into play in Israel if jews were being slaughtered. Also, you say that this hasn't been tested, well it was first tested during World War II, and then when there was the 6 day war, Israel asked for assistance from the United States and they were told no. Only after all these Arab nations started to take over in Israel and thousands of Israeli's died, then the United States came. Israel warned the USA what would happen, yet they didn't listen until it was almost too late. I compare this to an insurance policy, no one buys the coverage they need, until they have a loss that isn't covered, then they go buy that coverage, once it is too late. But with all that said, thank you so much for proving my point before. I know you didn't want to, but you did inadvertantly.

Posted by GOBigRedNeck! at 9:40 AM on Nov 26, 2008 | Report this comment

Wow is Iu ever the most anti-semitic, that is, anti-Jew place in the world, a bunch of ignorant rednecks! Stop arguing with them, you won't get thru-these are the same people that believe the Holocaust never took place. Go Big Red Neck!!!!!

Posted by Nonsense at 6:4 PM on Nov 25, 2008 | Report this comment

You're speculating. Your claim is not based on evidence, as your hypothetical has never been tested. Your scenario is also quite ahistorical and shallow when it comes to analyzing U.S. involvement in the Second World War. Successive Israeli governments have proven to be just as political as any other government. Those Jews who live, say in the U.S., still rely on their countries to defend them, and all other citizens. If they don't feel that their own countries can or are willing to do so, they can move to Israel. Less than half of the world's population has. Telling.

Posted by Get our of here at 5:10 PM on Nov 25, 2008 | Report this comment

What does half the jews live outside of Israel have anything to do with the fact that Israel is the one protecting us. If there was another Holocaust, or something like that, are we going to rely on the United States to show up 6 years late? No!! It is the founding fathers of Israel who claimed that Israel is a homeland for every jew around the world, that if a jewish person needed a safe place to go because of fear for their life for being jewish, Israel would welcome with open arms and give you citizenship. If there was another genocide of the jews, it is Israel that will come to our defense. I obviously know that there are jews in other parts of the world (there are even 100,000 jews that live in Iran of all places), I obviously didn't convey well enough the point I was trying to make. I was simply stating that it is Israel that makes sure another Holocaust doesn't happen. If there was no Israel, then who is going to ensure to the jewish people that a Holocaust won't happen ever again. Some countries might come to our aide after they exhaust diplomatic avenues, and get through all the politics with going into another country, and blah blah blah, other countries would come once its too late and 6 million of us are dead. But Israel would be there on day 1, regardless of political ramifications. I say again they are the ones protecting us from a Holocaust happening ever again.

Posted by Nonsense at 4:9 PM on Nov 25, 2008 | Report this comment

Get Out of Here's claim that "Israel" is the "only thing" protecting "the Jews" is particularly interesting, since less than half of the world's Jewish population lives in Israel.

Posted by Jak at 4:8 PM on Nov 25, 2008 | Report this comment

Actually, "Be Realistic," you are the one who is wrong. Clearly, you accept the founding myths with which you were inculcated. The history is clear for all to see, and is explicitly stated in the writings of the Ben Gurion and the Labor Zionist leadership. They drew on European socialist models. The fact that you've allegedly "been" 25 times, and are still so ignorant is what is "unbelievable." Or perhaps it's not, given you past nonsensical posts. Also, as usual, you say that I said things in previous posts that the record clearly shows I did not. I did not defend the system of government or autocratic regimes in the region. You are lying about that. Perhaps you think others won't double-check the validity and truthfulness of your statements. If you cannot be truthful about this, what can you be trusted to be truthful about? Your "fuel" is based on fictions and untruth. Happy holidays.

Posted by Be Realistic at 10:45 AM on Nov 25, 2008 | Report this comment

Actually Jak, I don't know why you continue to argue because you are flat out wrong. Israel was developed after the model of the United States. You can read it anywhere, or you can go to Israel where I have been about 25 times and learn all about it. I don't know how else to show you, but you are just wrong. Also, you can't make this Arab argument with me about other countries in the middle east. They are all run by dictators or radicalists or Islamic Republics. How can one defend this kind of government. So Sad. I am done on this message board. This has really given me even more of a fuel to fight for Israel in the future. I can't believe that people out there really feel that countries like Iraq (when saddam had rule), Iran, Pakistan, Afghanistan, and many others like them have good governments and are good for their citizens. Unbelievable. It's just Unbelievable.

Posted by Get out of here at 10:37 AM on Nov 25, 2008 | Report this comment

Hey jewinecuador, you are a disgrace!!! You think that if Israel wasn't around anymore that there would be peace, well then you are sadly wrong. The shiites and soonies and other arabs would still be killing each other. You do realize that countries like Iran and Iraq fought for years as complete enemies. It isn't just Israel that causes these problems. Also, I will probably get slammed for telling this kid that he is a disgrace, but for any jew to not realize that the establishment of Israel makes sure that there is never a Holocaust ever again, is just flat out naive. Israel is a homeland for all jews if we are ever persecuted ever again by the ways of genocide. They are the ones that make sure that all of you with jewish blood don't have to see what my family and many others have gone through with the Holocaust in Nazi Germany. Its funny you say that you are for World Peace, yet you don't support the one country that backs you up and oh ya, fights for peace. I am for World Peace too, but I am not so naive to think that a Holocaust could never happen again. Wake up and realize that Israel is the only thing that protects jews with all the anti-semitism in the world. This article that was written should show you this hate towards jews. This wasn't an anti-zionist article, or it was to some extent, but also hatred towards jews, yet you don't see that. Go convert to a different religion, we don't want you in the brotherhood if you can't see that Israel supports you every single day of your life, but you don't support it.

Posted by B2 at 5:53 PM on Nov 24, 2008 | Report this comment

Anti-Zionism is not anti-Semitism.

Posted by B at 12:32 PM on Nov 24, 2008 | Report this comment

anti-zionism IS anti-semitism.

Posted by jewinecuador at 10:44 AM on Nov 24, 2008 | Report this comment

im jewish. Im an anti-zionist because I am pro-peace.

Posted by EVW at 5:59 AM on Nov 24, 2008 | Report this comment

Everyone should take a look at this link: http://www.nkusa.org/

Posted by EVW at 5:20 AM on Nov 24, 2008 | Report this comment

Wow, I read a lot of the comments here and I am appalled. I worked in the diamond district in NYC and was asked point blank in an interview "was I Jewish?" by an Israeli who worked for that company. If I am, if I am not, that is 1.) 100% illegal he asked 2.) none of his damn business. BUT life is unfair as my mother always told me, you deal with it. I see people slamming others, calling them anti-semites (often misspelled here for some reason) as a knee jerk reaction. There are JEWS who are anti-zionists so PLEASE all this anti-semitic nonsense is coming from those who do not have an entire grasp on this subject and yes I have Jewish blood in my family.

Posted by EVW at 5:7 AM on Nov 24, 2008 | Report this comment

When Jews will stop racism between their own people (Ashkanazi, Sephardi, Bouhari and Mizrahi tribes) and realize the Ashkenazim treat the rest as second class citizens then they can call names to the rest of the world. Zionists have created laws, lobbies and organizations slurring those who oppose their Zionist tendencies. Due to this unfair discrimination and Zionist policy they have hoodwinked the world that they speak for all Jews and they DO NOT. A Zionist state which was not ordained by God is contrary to true Jewish law and there are those who know this good and well in Israel. Some have been assassinated because of this knowledge and their speaking publicly against it. I urge everyone to research this subject well before blindly speaking against it and search for the truth.

Posted by Jak at 11:28 PM on Nov 21, 2008 | Report this comment

Actually, the Israeli system was modeled more after European systems and not the American. The Israeli system was in turn dominated for many years by Ben Gurion's Labor Zionist movement, which was socialist (that oh so bad word this U.S. election cycle for the Republicans.) The early state was founded on socialist democratic principles. The Israeli state also has "administrative detention," which allows for individuals to be held for 6 months without charge. Although usually used for Arabs, it has sometimes been used for members of the radical settler right who are deemed a threat to the state. Actually, roughly 60% of Jordan's citizens today are Palestinians, not East Bank Jordanians. There are also significant Palestinian refugee populations in Syria and Lebanon, as well as Palestinian workers in the Arab Gulf states. If one wants to be historically nit-picky, there were residents of the land (Canaan) prior to the tribes of Israel, a fact that is verified in historical books of the Hebrew scriptures. So, are you advocating that the Native Americans take back all of the U.S.? If by "dominated by the Muslim faith," you mean most Arabs are Muslims, at least in name if not in practice, then you are correct. However, from personal experience and observation, the myth that every Arab Muslim is uber-religious (by the book) and everything stops in the Arab Middle East 5 times a day is ridiculously inaccurate. The Arab states, generally speaking, are as "dominated by the Muslim faith" as Israel is "dominated by Judaism." As I recall, the effort by the outgoing/former prime minister to have an Arab minister was met with fierce opposition. In the end, he did not get the ministry originally planned.

Posted by Be Realistic at 4:36 PM on Nov 21, 2008 | Report this comment

First off Jak, yes the Israeli government structure isn't the EXACT same as the United States. I said it was modeled after after the United States. Which means it is a liberal democracy. Go look up how Israel got started in 1948 and how President Truman played an instrumental role in making it a liberal democracy like the United States. Obviously it is different as there are 50 different parties that can run for office. You took what I said the wrong way. I said it was modeled after, not the exact same. Second, Yes, Israel is a Jewish State, so again it isn't exactly the same way as the United States, but what I am saying is Arabs or people of the Muslim faith can serve in the government as well as live in Israel. No Israeli can serve in any of these other countries government. You have freedom of religion in Israel just like you do in the United States. Women have rights, as well as the human rights are the same. Again you took my argument to the extreme when that is not how I meant. We all obviusly know that Israel is a jewish state, but again I say you have freedom of religion.

Posted by Be Realistic at 4:35 PM on Nov 21, 2008 | Report this comment

Third, I was probably being too broad when I say that every country is run by Islamic rule, but I was just trying to get across the point that everyone hates Israel which is most of the middle east and most of them are of the Islamic faith, so why do we want even more hate in the world. In general, most countries are dominated by the Muslim faith, not necessarily by Islamic rule, in the middle east, and adding another one that just wants to be like everyone else, and refuses to change their hateful ways is just not the way to go. Fourth, you are right, doing nothing with your land doesn't automatically give you the right to take it, however, that land was the jewish people's first and was taken from them. All we did was take it back. It would be like the Native Americans trying to take back the United States. It was their land first. Therefore, the land should be Israel's as we were booted out, and when we got strong enough, we took it back.

Posted by Be Realistic at 4:34 PM on Nov 21, 2008 | Report this comment

Lastly, again you are right, but not fully, not every Arab has the same rights as a jewish Israeli does, but we do allow them to be grandfathered in to live there. All other countries kicked out the Israelis. They still have freedom of religion and again are given humanity rights. Israel doesn't beat them or throw them in jail unless they break the law. They are allowed to open up a business, run for office, practice the muslim faith, pretty much do whatever they want except for a few things that could threaten Israel's national security. And to be honest, the Palestinians tried to go to Syria, they were kicked out, then to Egypt, they were kicked out, and to Jordan, they were kicked out. Nobody wants them in their country, so everyone says Israel has to take care of them when we were kicked out of that land previously, and they continue to let Hamas gain power and shoot rockets, but we still give them food and electricity. I think we are pretty damn nice. The arab countries rally behind the Palestinians, but they don't even want them. We do more for the Palestinians than any other Arab nation, even though they hate us. I have no sympathy for any nation against Israel, because we have a piece of land that is smaller than Florida, at some points it is only 3 miles wide, and there is only 12 million jews in the world. If you forgot, Hitler tried to wipe us off the planet, including most of my family, so to be honest I don't think we should give a damn thing to anyone. We have a right to live in the land that we occupied first, and live in peace just like President Truman gave us the right to do.

Posted by Jak at 2:32 PM on Nov 21, 2008 | Report this comment

Actually, Israel's government isn't modeled after the U.S.', as the U.S. does not have a proportional parliamentary system. As for the "secular" nature of both states, the U.S. is far more secular than Israel. The U.S. has no religious affairs ministry or fund religious communal councils and programs, as the Israeli government does. Most governments in the Middle East are not, in fact, "Islamic" as "Be Realistic" suggests. Rather, they are secular autocracies. Egypt, Tunisia, Jordan, Syria, etc. are not ruled by religious scholars and religious law is not the law of the land. The argument that one can appropriate land because the previous residents "did nothing" with it (though this is also false), is telling. So, if I feel you aren't using your land well, I have the right to take it over myself? The argument that all citizens are afforded exactly the same rights and benefits has been disproven. The funding for Arab and Jewish Israeli districts is not the same. "Be Realistic" has a skewed view.

Posted by Be Realistic at 1:9 PM on Nov 21, 2008 | Report this comment

People who are pro-palestine or anti-zionist aren't necessarily anti-semetic. But the fact that they agree with this article shows their anti-semetism. This article doesn't only speak of how people should believe in anti-zionism, it also speaks of anti-semetism. So if one who is pro-palestine or anti-zionism wants to show that they aren't anti-semetic, but just anti-zionists, then tell us why. Don't just say that you agree with the article and that it is truthful, because there are many things in that article that aren't truthful and are anti-semetic. Also, I find it so hard to believe that everyone wants to cut off funding to Israel when they have helped the US in so many different ways. How about we cut of funding to Egypt, Saudi Arabia, Afghanistan, and stop borrowing from Russia and China, because all of those countries listed are enemies of the United States. Shouldn't we give money to our allies who modeled their government after ours? and Not give money to those who threatens with violence. Most of you I assume are living in the United States. Did it ever occur to you guys that the reason that the United States is allies with Israel is more than just the liberal democracy, but rather that the US can control the middle east by being allies with the country (Israel) who is everyone else's biggest enemy. They all hate Israel, so when the US backs them, they are gaining control over what everyone else can do because of our world power status. Please go learn how world politics work and what has made the US a superpower, and then you will find out why we back certain countries.

Posted by Be Realistic at 1:8 PM on Nov 21, 2008 | Report this comment

Also, Israel's economy has a bigger surplus in just 60 years than every middle eastern country combined. Palestine did nothing while they had that land. Israel helps with so many inventions, while the Palestinians won't even let their children go to school. We live in a country that separates church from state and that has been pretty good for us, yet you all want another Islamic run country. Did you guys see the woman the other day in Iran that was beaten almost to death for not wearing a head scarf. How can any of you be in favor of these Islamic extremist dictatorships. At least in Israel, they are affored all the same rights you get in the United States. I feel that all of you who are pro-palestine or anti-zionist just want to preach hate, because I can't figure out for the life of me how people think that Israel isn't good for the world. We do so much, and if we weren't here and it was just Palestine, do you think the fighting would stop? Absolutely not.

Posted by Jak at 3:18 AM on Nov 21, 2008 | Report this comment

It's also interesting how those who complain about others "slamming" people procede to do the same thing.

Posted by Jak at 3:13 AM on Nov 21, 2008 | Report this comment

It's interesting how those who say they're against stereotypes and insults procede to insult everyone at IU.

Posted by click at 8:51 PM on Nov 20, 2008 | Report this comment

It's "hypocrites" who is the "automaton"--you are a robot who has to go against anyone who speaks out against Chaudhry's article---you are ridiculous! Let me now brace myself for more slams of some kind from you, they're automatic! Open your eyes, ya blind bat and see the article for the hate it is already. The only hypocrite is YOU, you say you're against the article, then defend it and insult everyone else...you must be taking a logic class at IU.

Posted by Hypocrites at 7:13 PM on Nov 20, 2008 | Report this comment

"Arya, an idiot?" should follow their own advice, since their description applies to them more than anyone else. The writer is the automaton who clearly believes every founding myth they were ever taught.

Posted by um... at 5:16 PM on Nov 20, 2008 | Report this comment

Why is it that anyone who is Pro-Palestine or Anti-Zionist is automatically considered an Anti-Semite? Just because someone doesn't believe that we should be sending aid to Israel, doesn't mean that they hate Jews. Also, can we all take a step back and remember that the term "Semite" technically includes Arabic peoples, for instance Palestinian, so have fun with that.

Posted by arya, an idiot? at 1:13 PM on Nov 20, 2008 | Report this comment

Hey Arya, What are you, 6 years old? You say "well done mate," "finally some truth." Let's disregard the blatant anti-semetism in this article for a second, again lets just say for the sake of argument that there is no anti-smetism in this article. With that said, how can one believe that there is truth in this article. I have never seen more fabrications in such a short article. Where have you gotten your education from. Obviously, you haven't had any education if you can't put aside your biases and realize the lies that were told in this article. You are just another uneducated, incompetent, and sorry excuse for a human-being. All the jews want is an apology and to be treated as equals. Well it is people like you that give jewish people the fuel to fight. I should say ignorant people like you. Man, I am amazed on how short-sided people can be. I really hope you aren't this dumb to just believe everything you see or hear. I am pretty much at a loss for words for how stupid you can be. I don't really know how else to convey to you, that you just wrote a post that makes you look idiotic. I didn't know there were people in this country who are that uneducated. And don't try and tell any of us about the dec. of independance or the constitution, because it is clear that you know one clause and nothing else. IDIOT.

Posted by Hystericals at 1:33 AM on Nov 20, 2008 | Report this comment

Pure and simple! You kids, get off my lawn! Me offended, stop now it!

Posted by help@campusrape.org at 2:8 PM on Nov 19, 2008 | Report this comment

This article was HATE SPEECH pure and simple! The 1st Amendment does not require any publication to print everything from everyone. The IDS has no duty to publish Hate speech and in declining does not violate an individual's right to free speech. The IDS continue to publish comments that cross the line with regard to hate speech even though they can and should edit them from their site. I hope students will boycott the paper and advertisers will follow suit. This would be the consequence any publication would face out here in the real world for such irresponsible journalism.

Posted by arya at 7:18 AM on Nov 19, 2008 | Report this comment

welllllllll done mate... finally some truth .. and screw anti-semitism... ppl wake up its just an excuse...zionism=racism plain and simple.. being antizionist is not the same as being anti-semitist... AIPAC has got to go... it's a group of zionists and their idiot followers, who have steered America towards the abyss.. it is time we take back this country.. and restore it, so that it resembles something our founding fathers would and could admire...Read the declaration of independence... the constitution...and bill of rights...i noticed a bit about freedom of expression...

Posted by another brown man at 9:17 PM on Nov 18, 2008 | Report this comment

yeah. i dont know what this kid was thinking. thats like a man writing an op-ed about abortion.

Posted by Jak at 8:13 PM on Nov 14, 2008 | Report this comment

I know many students who go to IU and are quite open about being Jewish, without negative reactions. The majority of students I know don't tell the world what religion they belong to. I know many students who cannot choose to hide their identity, and I know others who face prejudice because they "look" a certain "way," i.e. their skin is brown or black, so they must be "a dirty" FILL IN THE BLANK. I know this from experience. One group certainly doesn't have a monopoly when it comes to being subject to prejudice and bigotry, at IU or anywhere else. If apologies are given, they should be given to all who have experienced such things.

Posted by reality of it at 6:16 PM on Nov 14, 2008 | Report this comment

I also had many acts of anti-semitism leveled against me,& when I went to tell an R.A., they laughed. The abuse got physcial, but 30 years ago, we ignored a lot more than today. I knew if I told, I would have been run out on a rail, and it was imperative due to my life circumstance, that I leave with a degree---no transfer was possible. I lived in abject poverty while at IU, & got in on a merit scholarship. I know many students who go to IU and who do NOT tell anyone they are Jewish, they blend in and "serve their time" to get the degree and get out. Much like I did, but here we are thirty years later in the same spot.... Instead of correcting spelling errors (in emotional posts) it would be nice to hear someone in charge of the University apologize to the Jews who have "endured" at IU. The article is really not a good thing for the school and the learning lab of IDS--teachers there are dropping the ball... Believe me, we are not a few, we are many who remember Bloomington as hurtful, hard, and often frightening years.

Posted by Jak at 5:33 PM on Nov 14, 2008 | Report this comment

Anti-Semitic with an "i". So, you're angered about stereotypes and bigotry toward one group of people, but then turn around and display the same behavior towards others. How do you know everyone in the town is "anti-Semetic (sic)"? You don't. You are making gross generalizations about tens of thousands of people, in the town and at the university. You also say the university is "crappy," which national rankings for many programs dispute, because of what a minority of bigots did. Of course, perhaps you think that everyone at IU is a bigot. Then you are making the same gross false generalizations as the bigots themselves. You display the same callous attitude that you are criticizing. Hypocritical.

Posted by Jewish Alumni at 1:18 PM on Nov 14, 2008 | Report this comment

Here, I will say it so everyone can know. I am Jewish. I hated this article. It was completely anti-semetic, hurtful, and hateful. About 75 Jewish people I know that I sent this article to were also extremely offended. As an IU alumni, I will never give another dollar of my money again to this crappy university. I also know that most of the people I know from IU that are Jewish have said the same thing to me. It isn't just because of the article, we went through some very anti-semetic things while belonging to a Jewish fraternity at IU. Swastikas keyed into my car, people touching me and saying "ewww I have jew on me." People asking me where my horns are, People telling me that Hitler had it right, People telling me that they hate jews because that is what their parents told them to do. So to be honest, I have no sympathy for any of you posting to defend this, I have no sympathy for the university or for the newspaper. Any writer or editor that had a hand in this should be fired, because hate shouldn't be printed even if it was an opinion article. Should some white supremicist be able to print an article in the IDS opinion section that reads "Praise Slavery." I think not. I feel disgraced, and will never tell anyone that I was an IU grad again. Thank god I went to graduate school, so I can say I am an alumni from somewhere else. Screw IU and everything that anti-semetic town stands for. Last thing, Its funny how the retraction printed by the editor didn't even apologize to the jewish people. This article offended jews, and no one else. What I mean is, others might be offended, but it was only the jews singled out, and the editor failed to single us out with an apology. Completely tasteless and disgraceful.

Posted by Jak at 10:51 AM on Nov 14, 2008 | Report this comment

"...perhaps they are Jewish." By "alert's" own admission, there is no way to tell. Non-Jews may, and were, also critical and offended by the editorial. Thus, it is impossible to "know" whether someone is Jewish or simply based on an Internet comment. The basic argument of "alert" and "Read-it" seems to be that because they did not like one editorial, the entire newspaper is "undeserving." Thankfully, their attempts to sway opinion, based on this flimsy "evidence", will certainly fail. "alert's" statement about blindness applies to their side as well.

Posted by Ruff Rider at 6:29 AM on Nov 14, 2008 | Report this comment

Could we please kill this post? The comments and lack of debate on both sides is appalling and distracting. However, this is a good lesson to the editor. If you have to put editor notes to clarify your staff authors writing, maybe you should spend more time reviewing his work before publishing the article.

Posted by alert at 6:22 AM on Nov 14, 2008 | Report this comment

Go back and read the entries, if they say "we" are offended, perhaps they are Jewish....BG gave an "example"....Once again, Read-It has it correct, do NOT respond or engage in debate, only use the websites given to alert awards people that this paper is not deserving....You will never get those who are blind to see the hate in the article, Hate is without reason. When you have such deep comments like, "You know who were like the Nazis? The Nazis." there is no debate.

Posted by Acadia at 2:31 AM on Nov 14, 2008 | Report this comment

It's interesting to see that those, like BG, who are complaining about Chaudhry's grossly stereotypical and grossly generalized treatment of Jews are willing to do the same to members of another religion.

Posted by Jak at 2:25 AM on Nov 14, 2008 | Report this comment

So, according to Orange & Blue, people who just SAY something are the same as the Nazis, who MURDERED millions of people. Yeah, that's logical. Or not. So ridiculous, you couldn't make it up (because Orange & Blue actually said such nonsense.)

Posted by Jak at 2:22 AM on Nov 14, 2008 | Report this comment

Actually, Orange & Blue, you are incorrect. "Hypocrites" never said anything about "Jews." How can one tell who is Jewish by a typed comment? Are you suggesting that people can tell who is Jewish over the Internet? You have inserted things into the comments (and I just read them) that aren't there, presumably so your non-logic makes "sense."

Posted by sunny at 8:13 PM on Nov 13, 2008 | Report this comment

Saying that I no longer wish to donate (which I have done for over two decades) is my right. Saying I don't think any other Jews should is my opinion--- When I see that Chaudhry's opinions seem to be the only ones being defended, can you blame me?

Posted by Hold on.. at 5:49 PM on Nov 13, 2008 | Report this comment

Israeli Ex-Pat, I have to disagree. I am not giving my hard earned money to this school who allows not only this, but do some research, lots of anti-semetic acts to go on and does nothing. In a perfect world, your ideas are correct. I was really hoping no one would equate Jews with money, but I figured that would happen eventually. I know many non-Jews that are done contributing as well. You're in America now, everyone uses money "to push their ideas through", no matter their religion.

Posted by Orange & Blue at 5:38 PM on Nov 13, 2008 | Report this comment

Thanks BG for the great point, also to Read-It, you are both right on the mark. Hypocrites does more slamming of anyone on the board; "more nonsense from..." "sad," "lightweight", "reactionary bigot", "don't skip doses", "ignorant", etc. etc.. to not one, but all,who disagree with him, and yeah-Chaudhry.Who would know he disagreed with him? You cannot debate people who say Jews go to the "mandatory nazi reference" when discussing anti-semetism. Any historian I've ever met always references Nazis in that discussion, which I agree, can't be had here. You know who are like the Nazis? People who say we shouldn't reference them or use the word anti-semite and then tell the Jews not to be "offended." You couldn't make this up!

Posted by BG at 1:21 AM on Nov 13, 2008 | Report this comment

could you imagine if someone were to hypothetically write something remotely along these lines in regards to Islam? Last time it happened as a cartoon depiction of Muhammud, and we remember how peaceful that was!

Posted by Hypocrites at 12:1 AM on Nov 13, 2008 | Report this comment

"had enough": You're not funny, just sad. (1) I thought Chaudhry's article was crap, and he is not my idol. You must know all...Maybe you're God?! (in your own mind, don't skip doses) (2) I think that many of the responses, such as yours, are more bigoted than anything in the column. I see you make the mandatory "Nazi" reference. You know who were like the Nazis? The Nazis. You are clearly the type of lightwight who immediately throws out "Nazi!" and "anti-Semitism" charges at anyone who doesn't agree with you. You are a sad being, for sure. You aren't hysterical, just a reactionary bigot who thinks everyone who disagrees with your ramblings is a "Nazi."

Posted by Israeli Expat at 11:16 PM on Nov 12, 2008 | Report this comment

THE REAL HATE IS IN THE COMMENTS Going through and reading these posts, they are far more hateful than anything stated in the article. This one expression of opinion has created an almost lynch mob like mentality in this comment board. Grab yer pitch forks and torches people, we gonna have us a good ol fashioned lynchin and burn down the IDS while we’re at it. I mean if you want to attack the article/author, point out holes in his or her rhetoric, use facts to discredit the information, but do not resort to threats and name calling. This was an opinion article, and people are entitled to their opinion, no need to get your panties in a bunch because you don’t agree. And comments like “Every Jewish donor to IU should close up their pocketbooks until a formal apology is issued.” do not help what so ever, for they just re-solidify the gross misconception some people have about us. We should not use money as a means of pushing through our ideals, because those that are poor are then likely to identify with this writer, especially when money is being used to change an organization that promotes freedom of speech.

Posted by had enough at 5:32 PM on Nov 12, 2008 | Report this comment

Hypocrites, you are so funny. I picture you in a little nazi cheerleading outfit just a cheering Chaudhry on. You are judge, jury (and in your dreams--executioner)to all who oppose your idol Chaudhry. Nonsense? Who are you to call it nonsense? You chime in only to trash talk and belittle others, so turnabout is fair play! Get off the computer and go brush your tooth, that is, after you tell everyone how hysterical I am.

Posted by censorship at 12:44 PM on Nov 12, 2008 | Report this comment

The IDS censors these replies and refuses to publish all replies, our little "learning lab" has posted one attacking chaudrhy, which twice now has been removed by the IDS. NO profanity, but they allow profanity and no misquotes though they allow this too. WHAT ABOUT OUR FIRST AMENDMENT RIGHTS?

Posted by Hypocrites at 10:49 PM on Nov 11, 2008 | Report this comment

More hysterical temper tantrums from "the outraged."

Posted by Jeremy Shere at 4:47 PM on Nov 11, 2008 | Report this comment

I wonder if the author has ever been to Israel? Does he know anything about the place beyond what he may have spent a few minutes reading online? Has he studied Israeli history or the long, complex history of the Arab-Israeli conflict? Based on the article, I assume the answer is no to all of these questions. Anyone who has taken the time to think carefully about this issue knows that there are no easy answers. A fair, balanced and intelligent column would never make the sloppy intellectual error of blithely condemning an entire nation as "corrupt and pernicious" based on scant knowledge of the relevant history and political context. It's truly a shame that the IDS saw fit to publish such a shoddily researched and poorly conceived piece of writing. Just because this is an opinion column doesn't mean that all opinions are equally valid and worthy of publication. The opinion expressed here is one based on ignorance and an attempt to stir controversy instead of reasoned argument.

Posted by Read-it at 2:23 PM on Nov 11, 2008 | Report this comment

Please email this article to: lrochester@spj.com and info@studentpress.org Then go to Chaudrhy's latest hate garbage published today and do the same, http://www.idsnews.com/news/story.aspx?id=64388&comview=1 These organizations have bestowed many awards on the IDS in the past and should be made aware of the body of work they are currently turning out.

Posted by A zionist at 1:7 PM on Nov 11, 2008 | Report this comment

Chaudhry wrote another very anti-semitic column today! I can't believe this garbage: http://www.idsnews.com/news/story.aspx?id=64388&comview=1&sc=1#comment

Posted by caller at 12:53 PM on Nov 11, 2008 | Report this comment

Don't worry, they won't initiate any apology to the jewish students. I have called and asked for the editor many times, with them always telling me that she is out, and that she would call me back. Well, it has been over two weeks and 15 phone calls later, I have yet to receive a call back. The university is bigoted, the newspaper is bigoted, and the people running the newspaper are bigoted. At least that is how I see it until I receive a proper apology.

Posted by Curious at 12:49 PM on Nov 11, 2008 | Report this comment

Xavier, if "the majority of Arab states have direct or indirect diplomatic ties with Israel", please tell me why I am not allowed to enter any Arab nations other than Egypt and Jordan simply because of the Israeli stamp on my American passport?

Posted by sunny at 6:21 PM on Nov 10, 2008 | Report this comment

Every Jewish donor to IU should close up their pocketbooks until a formal apology is issued. Certainly, the IU brass have been informed and sit idly by and do nothing. They know there have been 117 responses to this article, they just don't care. There has been no debate only -defense; true debate requires extensive research. Debate is grounded in fact, in any reputable college debate team, you'd be disqualified for hate speech grounded in lies. IU doesn't teach this, they allow Chaudhry to cut and paste from his Pro Palestinian site and rely on enough ignorant students to scream "free speech!" and brag about what a forward thinking place IU is. Teach your writers (and I use this term loosely) that when you write opinions based in hate and lies, live with the consequences...which for any Jew should be no more donating until an apology is issued! No more money to IU!

Posted by Hypocrites at 6:14 PM on Nov 10, 2008 | Report this comment

More nonsense from Read-it.

Posted by Read-it at 9:15 AM on Nov 10, 2008 | Report this comment

Have NOT yet seen a real apology to the Jewish students, faculty, and alumni? Will Chaudrhy remain on staff at the IDS? What will Chaudrhy's next assignment be? Does anyone know what websites this student is affiliated with? It's looking more and more like accountability at the IDS died with Mr. Adams. Probably NOT going to see many more awards for exceptional journalism like in years past.

Posted by Xavier at 9:49 PM on Nov 09, 2008 | Report this comment

Yazholes: A clear example of what not to aspire to. A vitriolic, logic-less, bigoted rant, one which clearly shows that s/he cannot spell. This person certainly isn't the one to teach anyone else about tolerance or how not to be a bigot.

Posted by Xavier at 1:37 AM on Nov 08, 2008 | Report this comment

Actually, the majority of Arab states have direct or indirect diplomatic ties with Israel, and the majority of the Arab states have signed on to the Arab League peace initiative.

Posted by mitchell blatt at 1:32 AM on Nov 08, 2008 | Report this comment

Israel occupies a small area among a large region of Arab states, among them, many states that seek to destroy Israel.

Posted by Hypocrites at 9:29 PM on Nov 07, 2008 | Report this comment

No, What the..?!!!!, it's you who doesn't understand the limits of the trustees power over newspaper content, or the limits on the first amendment. You also seem to think that you have the right not to be offended, which of course, is not true.

Posted by Hypocrites at 9:24 PM on Nov 07, 2008 | Report this comment

Unfortunately (for you) readit, you are the ignorant one, if you think that the trustees can, at whim, censor newspaper content or take retaliatory action. And no, I am not on staff, related to anyone staff, or friends with anyone on staff. In fact, I don't even know anyone on staff. I also did not speak about the trustees' role over the university as a whole, you invented that reference. I also didn't say that the columnists should not have, or do not have, any oversight. You invented that, too. You are good at assuming things, just bad at assuming things which are true.

Posted by What the..?!!!! at 7:34 PM on Nov 07, 2008 | Report this comment

"Journalist" states, "Lets just take away the fact that this was anti-semitism at it's best"....No, let's NOT, that's the whole point!!! You don't go onto edit hate...Hello....anybody home? As far as "Hypocrites" is concerned, even if a trustee or administator read this swill over his morning coffee, after the fact, action should have been taken!! A called should have been placed immediately to correct the matter. This newspaper is associated with the University and they have an obligation to not only teach, but publish with standards. You clearly do NOT understand the power of the trustees or Administration, even after the fact....You don't let the editor's lame explanation speak for the Univerity. Yes, everyone has opinions--and we also have body orifices, to put it nicely, but not everyone wants to see them. As far as your First Ammendment rights, they are not without limits. After all, if you can't yell "Fire!" in a crowded theatre, how the hell do you justify Chaudhry's right to say whatever he wants? A new day has dawned in America; not long ago many prominent people were trying to ban the racial epithet for African American. There are limits of decency in a civilized society. I bet we can all think up tons of horrible titles to Opinions that a student may want to write---should they be allowed to be printed so we can honor their First Ammendment rights....the correct answer is NOT IN A STUDENT NEWSPAPER!!! Go to a neonazi blog on the web, and by all means, share your opinions!!!! Now you're infringing on my rights. There are opinions that should never be allowed to be printed in a student newspaper, Chaudhry's being one of them. Clearly, I'm not alone in this line of thinking. Now I'm told to "calm down" and not over-react???! I left Bloomington in the 70's. IU seems to have turned into an idiot factory.

Posted by readit at 6:8 PM on Nov 07, 2008 | Report this comment

Hypocrites, you just bound and determined to have the last word on this. Your the one who doesn't know what power the Truestee's have over the governance of this University. To refer to 18 and 19 year-olds as columnists independant from oversite is ridiculous. You must be a relative of the professional staffer who YES should read everything before it goes into print!!! The printed word can injure,and even destroy if placed in the wrong hands, even if just a college campus.

Posted by Hypocrites at 4:19 PM on Nov 07, 2008 | Report this comment

More self-righteous "rage" from WHAT A SHAME... Does the academic adviser see everything that the IDS publishes? There are laws and regulations that guide what role an academic adviser plays. Don't believe me? Check with the Student Press Law Center. Similarly, the university trustees cannot impose their will on the newspaper, and you're sorely misinformed if you think they can. You can wait all you want. The responsibility rests first and foremost with the columnist, then the section editor, then the managing editors/editor(s) in chief. You make claims without any evidence, and think that your displeasure should be the deciding factor. Despite the overall crappiness of the original editorial, thankfully they are not. "Journalist" is one of the few nuanced voices here.

Posted by Journalist at 3:41 PM on Nov 07, 2008 | Report this comment

To Hypocrites, I am a journalism major, and I have read everything from these so-called journalism majors. There is no evidence showing that any of these people were trying to put restraints on an opinion article. All the journalism majors understand what the opinion section of the newspaper is suppoed to represent. The problem the journalism majors have, including myself, is the fact that the opinion editor and chief editor thought this was ok to put in their newspaper. Let's just take away the fact that this was anti-semtism at its best. The fact is that the article was written with no proof or facts of any kind. The editor said this was supposed to spark debate on US-Israeli conflict, yet there is wordings in there like "the jews have a monopoly on god" and other quotes like that. As a journalism major, I have no problem with an opinion article that questions whether Israel should be around or not, but what I do have a problem with is editors allowing anti-semetism and clear-cut propoganda to be printed in their newspaper. That is the difference.

Posted by WHAT A SHAME at 1:26 PM on Nov 07, 2008 | Report this comment

This is not about the first amendment it is about a publication that DISCRIMINATES regularly on what to publish and what not to publish. They also discriminate on whose information they feel is worthy and credible and make CHOICES daily on what will run in their paper. The notion that the IDS is obligated in any way to help Chaudry (who was not writing a work of fiction) exercise his first amendments rights is beyond ignorant. Chaudry has the right to post his views on all kinds of hate sites all over this country but the real problem here is that this University and this Student Paper had NO OBLIGATION to help him out yet they CHOSE otherwise. The academic director of the IDS was either asleep at the wheel or gave his stamp of approval, either way he should be removed. It will send clear messages to these students that when you choose what to publish and what not to publish there are consequences that have serious impacts on reputation, culture and the lives of your readership. If there were a publisher for this paper I believe heads would have rolled over this and a proper apology would have been published. We shall all have to wait on the Trustees…

Posted by Hypocrites at 12:47 PM on Nov 07, 2008 | Report this comment

It's interesting that so many self-proclaimed "journalism" majors have no understanding of legal codes and regulations, and seek censorship for opinions, however idiotically written, they don't like.

Posted by What the..?!!!! at 10:8 PM on Nov 06, 2008 | Report this comment

Chaudhry's article is beyond incendiary, it is hate. I am a graduate of IU and ashamed to say so. Thank goodness I also went on to school in FL, and IU doesn't hold a candle to the education I got since leaving. There's no way you could be grooming Chaudhry to be a journalist; I don't know what his or her major is, but IU is cheating a student out of an education here. What could have been a "teachable moment" upon a quick edit, once again got ignored by the editor. When that happened, why didn't Administration step up? What kind of debate could you possibly be encouraging me, as a Jew, to engage in when you publish "If Jews really are G-d's chosen people, then the Jewish state of Israel does not need American support." Ron Johnson, your media man, has earned his walking papers on this one, but the typical douchebaggery of the administration of IU is to turn a blind eye. Chaudhry probably believes the Holocaust never happened, too. The next time IU's call center rings me up for money, which they do constantly, I'll let them know when Chaudhry apologizes not for opinions, but not having facts, or sources sited, and when Ron gets his leave, I'll donate. In the meantime, I think I'd better send my Jewish dollars to Israel.

Posted by OneProudJew at 8:22 PM on Nov 06, 2008 | Report this comment

Ahhh, Indiana University continues it's long standing tradition of anti-semetism. I experienced this first hand as an IU student 20 years ago. This trash that the IDS prints in absolutely shameful. The author of the article should definitely stay in school. He/she has an awful lot to learn. Perhaps they feel segregation based on race should be re-instated. Would that be so wrong?? If the IDS were allowed to print hate like this regarding African Americans, all hell would break loose. It sure as hell would not be backed by the faculty or advisors with lame excuses like "It is meant to encourage debate." Bullshit! But in Indiana, it's o.k. to hate jews. No, really, its allright. They're not like us. They're different. Write all the hate you want. Sure, we'll publish it for you!And don't worry. If it upsets a few kikes, we've got your back!! We'll Tell them that this is a "Learning Labratory" and that your insipid remarks were only meant to "encourage debate". (That paragraph there is called sarcasm, for all you dumb little hoosier rednecks!) As an alum and a journalism major, I am truly ashamed. This is clearly not the same standard that was upheld or taught to me as a student 20 years ago. The editor's fubling, stumbling excuse for this is shameful. Mr. Editor, Hitler called, he said you left your armband and brown shirt at the rally!!

Posted by Louise Spiegle at 4:58 PM on Nov 06, 2008 | Report this comment

Please write to the Trustees though their secretary Robin Roy Gress at; rgress@indiana.edu and ask for new leadership at our beloved IDS. This article and the follow-up article, "Column sparked debate" should never have been published. Any newspaper in my community or surrounding communities would have found themselves shut down by their advertisers. Since the main advertiser of the IDS is the University it is incumbent on them to make it known that there will be consequences for this horrible judgment call and failure in leadership at the IDS.

Posted by Jewish Perspective at 12:41 PM on Nov 06, 2008 | Report this comment

To Honestly -- This isn't about one man's useless opinion, because I agree with you that one man's opinion doesn't mean anything. It is the simple fact that this university newspaper thought it was ok to print an article with the title "Praise Anti-Zionism" that is somehow going to spark debate. What a bunch of bullshi*. I went to IU, and belonged to a jewish fraternity, and the stuff that was said to me, drawn on our house (swastikas), stuff drawn on my car and others, is absulutely absurd. There are many, many, many anti-semetic people at that university, so when the university newspaper has now joined in on thinking that this is ok to print this article, well then I have a serious problem with it. Obviously the people who think this is no big deal aren't jewish. I listen to my cousin that survived the holocaust by escaping, and she tells me the story of watching the rest of my and her family get killed in front of her eyes(shot in the head, marched into gas chambers, raped). I see anti-semetism on a weekly basis, and I am sick of it. So you all that are defending this or think that this isn't that big of a deal, well shut the fuc* up and walk a few days in my shoes and see how much jewish bigotry is spewed my way.

Posted by Chris Marella at 9:3 AM on Nov 06, 2008 | Report this comment

IU students are alcoholics, hypocrites, in pathetic physical shape, and all pray to the invisible man in the sky. You mindless sheep deserve everything that happens to you.

Posted by kid1 at 8:50 AM on Nov 06, 2008 | Report this comment

This is anti-semetic propaganda. This writer should be fired from his position so he can take the time to read a few more history books. I ask the writer this: Have you forgotten the 6 million Jews who were persecuted for simply being Jewish? Have you forgotten the countless numbers of terrorist attacks on Israel which has cost hundreds and thousands of lives? Have you forgotten that Israel is the only democracy in the Middle East and has some of the best military intelligence in the world? Maybe to you Israel is no big deal and without it you see no problems. However, being that there is less than 1% of Jews in the world, it's all the Jewish people have left. Leave us in peace for once, that's all we ask. You talk about an apartheid in Israel, but what about the thousands of years of persecution of the Jews? Israel doesn't want to have to occupy regions like the Gaza strip or west bank. Unfortunately, the Palestinians and other terrorist organizations that have influence over the Palestinians, do not cooperate with Israel even after Israel has tried numerous times to make peace and has given the Palestinians many resources to use at their disposal. So on that note, go read a book you ignorant SOB.

Posted by honestly. at 2:6 AM on Nov 06, 2008 | Report this comment

everyone needs to calm down. this is one mans (ultimately useless) opinion, and yours are no better. seriously.

Posted by from former IDS writer at 3:42 PM on Nov 05, 2008 | Report this comment

As a collegue of mine said to me who is a graduate from the Indiana University School of Journalism (when it was #1 1998-2001) and a former student employee of the IDS (she was a journalist), and I quote, "This was complete irresponsible journalism." "The IDS was not run this way when I was there." "I can't believe the editor didn't even issue a real retraction or apology to jewish people." "I am apalled that I once said I was a graduate of that school and an employee of that newspaper." I think my colleague has nailed it on the head with those comments.

Posted by help@campusrape.org at 2:16 PM on Nov 05, 2008 | Report this comment

Every academic advisor and director of the IDS should loose their job over the publication of this hate filled article. This clearly demonstrates that these inexperienced students are not getting the direction and leadership from those currently employed to guide and teach them. Irresponsible journalism validates the ignorant and brings dishonor to the Indiana University School of Journalism. Dave Adams would have been mortified!!!

Posted by unbiased observer at 11:53 AM on Nov 05, 2008 | Report this comment

With all do respect, this did not spark dialogue at all, or at least not the kind that one would want. This sparked people accusing others of anti-semetism and being racist. If the IDS truly wanted to spark debate about US-Israeli policy then an article would have been printed about that with maybe a title like, "Is Israeli Policy Flawed?" or something like that. The fact of the matter is that this article was titled "Praise Anti-Zionism." I didn't even have to read the rest of the article to know that this title represented hate filled fabrications against a US ally and friend and jewish people. I am disgusted that people think this is ok because it is our first ammendment right of free speech. If we start allowing this in news publications and universities, then where is the limit. Should one be allowed to write an article with the title "Praise Slavery." I am pretty sure that wouldn't spark debate, but spark violence. I am all for our first ammendment, but hate filled speech should be reserved for talking with friends, not news outlets and universities because that causes riots. If we want to talk about Israel, or the Palestinians, or the United States relationship with them then that is fine, but this article was definitely not that by any means. And it is even a bigger insult to Israel and jews everywhere that the EDITOR didn't even make an apology to jewish population at IU. The editor's note said this was supposed to spark dialogue about US-Israeli policy? How laughable? I have a very hard time believing the Editor that this was supposed to spark dialogue, because I spoke to the Editor and she didn't even read this article before being printed, so she thought about saying this was supposed to spark debate after the article was printed. The editor should be FIRED!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Posted by Stupid Is As Stupid Does at 9:55 AM on Nov 05, 2008 | Report this comment

Now, now. The Indiana Daily Student nor Indiana University condone Yahya Chaudhry’s silly opinion column. Truly. The IDS is a “learning lab,” and 94 comments on this blog, numerous phone calls to the newsroom and an Inbox full of letters to editor later, the suspect columnist and the IDS student managers/editors have no doubt received a “real world” education in how readers might and will react to certain tones, words, and thoughts. Thanks to everyone involved in this fantastic spectacle, from the IDS for starting the dialogue to everyone else who has advanced this discussion and deliberation on anti-Zionism, Zionism, the ongoing humanitarian crisis of both the Palestinian and Israeli peoples, the roles and responsibilities of the IDF and democratic Palestinian governments, and the tenants of Judaism to name but a few angles of feedback. This column, while ridiculous and scandalous, is a reflection of the beauty of our U.S. First Amendment to “free speech” as exemplified by the sharing of opinion from all sides in a peaceful and meaningful way. Agreeing to disagree … what a wonderful lesson indeed.

Posted by C. at 3:35 PM on Nov 04, 2008 | Report this comment

Back to "Israeli's" mythical land: If it's your duty to "know" these things, you are in dereliction of duty. If, as you claim, you are "seeing these things every day," you may need glasses. Or contact lenses. Or Lasik. Contrary to "Israeli's" claims, it is the Israeli government and military command that make the rules and regulations. However, "Israeli's" hysterical response is very instructive. It suggests that, as if often said, individual Israeli soldiers take the law into their own hands and disregard even official state regulations and rules. What is funny is that "Israeli" talks about bias and ignorance. When one fact checks all of the erroneous claims s/he makes, it's clear who the real idiot/ignoramus is, the hysterical "Israeli." And no, "Israeli" dear, I do not use Wikipedia or "biased news outlets." You may find it helpful to do so, though.

Posted by C. at 3:34 PM on Nov 04, 2008 | Report this comment

More on "Israeli's" fantasies: As for the recent bulldozer attacks, "Israeli" is wrong again. The perpetrators of these attacks were Palestinian residents of Arab East Jerusalem, who are classified differently than West Bank Palestinians by the Israeli government. West Bank (and Gaza) Palestinians do not have Israeli passports, as "Israeli" claims. I invite readers to check for themselves. With a U.S. passport, I am (and have not been) able to "freely roam" all over the West Bank, let alone Israel, while in a Palestinian taxi. Strange, if Palestinians are allowed to roam freely all over. Palestinians aren't even allowed to use all of the roads in the West Bank, let alone "a Oh, and by the way, these attacks occurred in Jerusalem and the attackers had ID papers that West Bank Palestinians do not have (they also have different car license plates.) S/he also assumes that because they have served in the IDF, s/he automatically "knows" about all things. I have friends who have served in the IDF and aren't that arrogant (or idiotic) to presume that they know "everything" because of their service. S/he claims to "know" what Palestinians do and don't do, as if being in the Israeli military makes them an expert on the Palestinians. S/he makes an argument akin to, "I am a (lowly) grunt soldier and thus I an expert on all things about the current military AND the history of past military conflicts." Unfortunately for them, this is a laughable and erroneous claim. Are current U.S. soldiers experts on the Spanish-American War? No, probably not. Oh, and it's "roam" buddy.

Posted by C. at 3:33 PM on Nov 04, 2008 | Report this comment

Unfortunately, "Israeli" exhibits the signs of their indoctrination. Again s/he misrepresents what I said in previous posts. For example, never did I say or suggest that Sinai was "the only" piece of land that Israel captured during the June 1967 War. "Israeli" also makes blanket assumptions: "All" Palestinians, and not even "most", in the West Bank have Israeli passports. So, it's you who are wrong about what I said. Contrary to what "Israeli" falsely claims, "the land" was not returned "for peace," save for Sinai and parts of the West Bank after Oslo. The withdrawal from Gaza was done unilaterally and not as part of any peace deal or talks. S/he is also wrong that "every" Arab nation attacked Israel during the June 1967 War. I see that s/he has changed the nature of what they said previously. Before, s/he claimed that "every" Arab state attacked, now they've backed off a little and say that is was "almost every." "Israeli" cannot even stick with one position, probably because they are factually wrong and they, as it evident, desperately trying to support the myths that they have been taught. S/he also makes blanket assumptions about "all" West Bank Palestinians based on those s/he has encountered while serving in the Israeli military. "Israeli" seems to have a love of making such blanket assumptions and claims based on anecdotal experiences. Again, this leads them to make easily disprovable claims of (erroneous) "fact." Oh, poor "Israeli," I did not say that one should rely solely on Israeli government sources. I was pointing out how ridiculous your claims are, since many of them are contradicted EVEN by Israeli government reports and official positions. I agree that one should not rely solely on such things, though you regurgitate pretty much every official state myth.

Posted by Israeli at 12:29 PM on Nov 04, 2008 | Report this comment

HAHAHA you talk of "readily available Israeli government sources," you really don't know how our conflict works, do you? You obviously believe everything that is put out by my government. Read between the lines buddy, don't listen to every biased news outlet. I laugh at your ignorance on this subject trying to tell me what happens in Israel, when I am the ONE ENFORCING THOSE LAWS. Do you tell a judge what his verdict is? No!!! So don't tell me what Palestinians do and don't do when I AM THE LAW along with my other IDF soldiers

Posted by Israeli at 12:28 PM on Nov 04, 2008 | Report this comment

And C. Palestinians can rome free in Israel and they have Israeli passports (the ones that live in the West Bank). I have taken them myself at checkpoints and allowed them to continue on because that is law and my orders by my commander in the Israeli Defense Force. But, ya, you are definitely right because you read something on Wikipedia. How much of a moron can you be to try and argue this stuff with me. You say you don't know everything about asthma even though you have it, well I do know everything about every war and every policy that deals with our surrounding neighbors. It is policy by the Israeli Defense Forces to be knowledgeable on all these matters, because we fight for our right to survive every single day. I invite you to join the IDF and then maybe you can learn about the 6 day war, or maybe you can see for your own eyes that many Palestinians have Israeli passports and can rome free. Maybe go do a little more research than looking up the 6 day war on the internet, or saying that this stuff is readily available by Israeli government sources. Because you will find that Israel took all those pieces of land in the 6 day war (so you were wrong about that), then gave most back for peace (at different times in the last 40 years), and you can find out about arabs roming free in Israel. In the past 6 terrorist attacks in Israel, where Palestinians bull dozed crowds of people, how do you think they got in those parts of Israel. Ummmmmmmm, its because they have frieking passports, you idiot. And most of the West Bank is Palestinians, so I don't know how else to convince you of this stuff other than to say that I was there and am there seeing it every day, so please, please, please don't talk about stuff you don't know because it is a giant insult to me and your intelligence.

Posted by Israeli at 12:26 PM on Nov 04, 2008 | Report this comment

Excuse me C., please don't talk about stuff you don't know. First off in the 6 day war, Sinai wasn't the only piece of land that Israel took. Egypt attacked towards the end of the war and we pushed them back, and by the end of the war Israel took control of the Golan Heights, East Jerusalem, and like I said before the Gaza Strip and the West Bank. I don't know if you happen to be a history major or what your deal is, but don't try and tell me what happened especially because you are wrong, because I am someone who has grown up studying, learning, and hearing about all these wars every day of my life. And almost every arab nation did attack us, (Egypt, Syria, Jordan, Saudi Arabia, Iraq, and some African countries like Sudan, Tunisia, Algeria, and Morocco) And you won't necessarily read about all the other aran countries that contributed weaponry and troops, because that is only something that Israeli intelligence and veterans from the war like my father can tell you about, because a lot of that was kept secret because of the rest of the world watching. But trust me, over 20 nations supplied troops against Israel. I still can't understand why you think you know more than I know about these wars and our Israeli Policy that again, I ENFORCE. You think you are smart or something because you read a piece of literature or go on the internet to find out some propoganda filled piece about what Israeli government thinks on a certain issue.

Posted by C. at 12:35 PM on Nov 02, 2008 | Report this comment

Those who make blanket assumptions and practice guilt by association are just as bad (and juvenile) as the writer of this crappy editorial. Some people "believe" in protection of speech until they feel offended. Unfortunately (for them) and fortunately for everyone else, that's not how the legal protection works. Here's an idea, one of those who is so offended should write a reasoned, well written response. Combat the ideas. It's more constructive than stewing in self righteousness.

Posted by Paul McNutt at 12:15 PM on Nov 02, 2008 | Report this comment

For the financial numbers, just take a the profit numbers from companies that make money off Israeli inventions (big ones would be cell phones, Windows NT, voice mail, AIM, Pentium chip technology, and slew of other tech & biotech innovations). That would be the raw number. If you want to find the number that goes only to the U.S. government, then take that raw number and multiply it by the applicable tax rate.

Posted by reneb at 9:44 AM on Nov 02, 2008 | Report this comment

The editor's "apology" is ingenuous and ridiculous. This column was intended to "advance the debate..."? No, this column was hate speech, intended to inflame tensions and promote the writers blatant anti-semitism. That this University allows such misuse of a student newspaper is apalling. My soon to be college aged student won't go to Indiana, and hopefully many other students will avoid this school as well. What a horrible place it must be.

Posted by Xavier at 7:9 PM on Nov 01, 2008 | Report this comment

Have any numbers about the financial benefit? I'm interested in knowing.

Posted by Paul McNutt at 4:14 PM on Nov 01, 2008 | Report this comment

I like how the columnist points out how much financial aid America gives to Israel, but neglects to mention how much financial benefit American gains from Israeli technology. The latter outweighs the former. Not to even mention diplomatic and military benefit that's hard to quantify...

Posted by C. at 6:14 PM on Oct 31, 2008 | Report this comment

Oh, more on "Israeli": "You are the one with false knowledge as I lived this every day of my life." Interesting, since a lot of what you claim is untrue and can be easily disproved. I've lived with asthma "every day of my life," and yet I don't claim to know everything about that. Of course, I'm also not blatantly ignorant about it either, nor do I try to present falsehoods as "facts." "And C. I am willing to bet you are anti-semetic for the simple fact that you are so adamently defending this article." Let's review this again, just for you, since you seem to need additional hand-holding. I have not defended this editorial. In fact, I previously stated that it was very poorly written and a shoddy piece. Perhaps you need glasses. Also, it's laughable that you can make such a serious claim about me without really knowing anything about me, and after misreading/distorting what I wrote or blatantly making stuff up. I'll be sure to tell my relatives that I really hate them, because you, the Psychic Miss Cleo said I do. W131 may be for you. Take it again, if necessary.

Posted by C. at 6:12 PM on Oct 31, 2008 | Report this comment

Actually, "Israeli," you are a clear example of what I was talking about, and it is you who (also) needs to do their research. I didn't defend the article. I agree that it is an incredibly shoddy and poorly written piece. I merely pointed out the hypocrisy of some of its critics doing what they accuse the editorial's author of. The major Israeli settlement blocs and the lands surrounding them that have been made off-limits to Palestinians have not been abandoned, and thus they have not "all but completely pulled out" of the West Bank. The Palestinians control much, much less than the "95%" of the West Bank that you claim. These facts that are easily verifiable. Also easily disproved is your claim that "Palestinians have Israeli passports." Most Palestinians do not and cannot "rome (sic..roam) the country at will, anywhere they want." This fact is easily verifiable from Israeli government sources. "Israel still has some Jewish citizens" in the West Bank? Try over 400,000. They have certainly not pulled out of the West Bank, a fact that is clear by skimming current news and formal reports, including those from the Israeli government. Also, during the June 1967 war, "every Arab nation" did not attack Israel. Gaza and the West Bank were not returned "for the peace," or for any other reason, after this war. Sinai, which the Israeli army captured, was eventually returned to Egypt as part of a peace treaty. Sorry, these are also all facts verifiable in the historical record. Of course, no where in my comments did I "defend" anything (the editorial or HAMAS), that's in your own imagination, or perhaps due to your desire to confuse the record and misrepresent what I have posted. Or perhaps it's because you lack rigorous reading and comprehension skills. You may also wish to review spelling.

Posted by Israeli at 3:8 PM on Oct 31, 2008 | Report this comment

Ummmm C. if that is what you like to call yourself. Maybe you should be the one doing a little research. As somebody from Israel, I will tell you with first hand knowledge that 95% of the West Bank is occupied by Palestinians. All of Gaza has Hamas rule. Yet, in Gaza, Hamas does not provide for the citizens, so Israel gives them food, shelter, electricity and many other requirements for living, free of charge. Israel does this even though they shoot rockets at us. We do that to help. Also, on the West Bank, this is where all the terrorism is stemming from as Palestinians have Israeli passports and are free to rome the country at will, anywhere they want. Israel still has some jewish citizens that live in the West Bank, however, they have all but completely pulled out of the West Bank. And during the 6 day war which many of my family members faught in, every Arab nation tried to come at us and we pushed them all back and won the war with no help from the US until the very end. We took control of Gaza and the West Bank, but then gave it back in good faith for peace. Stop defending teh West Bank and a Hamas run Gaza, because that is where all the terrorism in Israel stems from. You are rediculous. None of these countries will rest until the Palestinians occupy all of Israel, and it won't happen. You are the one with false knowledge as I lived this every day of my life. And C. I am willing to bet you are anti-semetic for the simple fact that you are so adamently defending this article. If you can't see the blatant anti-semetism here, then you too have slanted and skewed views that are just getting in the way of unbiased interpretation.

Posted by joe at 2:0 PM on Oct 31, 2008 | Report this comment

What a lazy hack job. This is the same guy who wrote another lazy hack job on the Nobel prize. Who's running this paper? Aren't there any requirements to who can write? Very unprofessional. If not for the crossword I wouldn't even pick up this shoddily run rag you clowns put out.

Posted by C. at 12:51 PM on Oct 31, 2008 | Report this comment

Contrary to what "Really?" erroneously claims, the West Bank is still controlled by Fatah and not HAMAS, which succeeded in taking over only Gaza. "Really?" also purports to "know" about the "reality" in countries s/he probably has never been to and knows very little about. Also, it's "(anti)SEMITIC," with an "i". A lot of people eager to throw around this loaded charge at the drop of a hat seem to not know how to spell the term correctly.

Posted by C. at 12:44 PM on Oct 31, 2008 | Report this comment

"Really?" shows the same ignorance of reality and facts in their response. The Israeli government has not withdrawn, unilaterally or otherwise, from the West Bank. Perhaps someone who is accusing another of poor research should be a little better doing it themself.

Posted by Really? at 12:24 PM on Oct 31, 2008 | Report this comment

I find it pretty unreal that such a factually inaccurate article was published without even so much as a proofread by an editor??? even in an opinion column. Firstly, beyond anything to do with Obama or Jesse or anyone else for that matter lets get the facts straight! Israel no longer occupies the West Bank or Gaza FYI Mr. Chaudhry, Israel unilateraly withdrew from both these territories in an effort to show the Palestian Authority they were ready and willing to negotiate peace with a two state solution. As it seems you are unaware, both Gaza and the West Bank were handed over to the Palestian Authority for which now only control the West Bank because of Hamas's bloody coup against there own people. Today Israel, like the US, has its share of problems we all know that no country or government for that matter is perfect.You say you are preaching "anti-zionism" which in principle I have no problem with as you are free in America to voice your opinion, however you at many points overstep the line of "anti zionism" into down right anti-sematism with your pokes at the chosen people. I will give you credit, you did at least do one bit of research looking up one hebrew word to throw in all of our faces. The bottom line is that the values of the United States align most closely with Israel. Freedom, democracy, religious toleration, human rights, freedom of press, we could go on and on. The kind of freedom that allows you to write your poorly researched and anti-semetic article even if many disagree. Instead of you enjoying a world class education at IU maybe we should send you over to Gaza or Iran or Syria to see the real way of life there. Then maybe you opinions on Israel will change.

Posted by difference at 12:10 PM on Oct 31, 2008 | Report this comment

First of all I am Catholic and I find this as a very racist article. I believe that, as many of the people have said, there is a difference between being anti-semitic and anti-zionism but this article crosses the line with its mocking of the Jewish religion. To say that they should just save themselves because they are the choosen people is way out of line. I am also fine with people voicing and opinion but I guarantee if someone wrote a middle east bashing article the IDS would be flooded with people pissed at the racism toward muslims

Posted by IU Alum at 11:46 AM on Oct 31, 2008 | Report this comment

I am very disappointed that the IDS and the University have been tarnished by such a scandalous article. I would encourage a much higher litmus test of quality and careful consideration before deciding to print such propaganda. The key to the Israeli Palestinian peace process is open dialogue and academic debate, but substandard and malicious contributions like this one are only detrimental to the cause of legitimizing the Palestinian endeavor towards statehood. I would furthermore like to thank Prof. Dershowitz for his response. I would encourage the author of this article to go and speak to Prof. Sinno if he is still around, I think that he could direct the author to some slightly more enlightening reading than the "Protocols of the Elders of Zion."

Posted by Everyone Has A Voice at 11:40 AM on Oct 31, 2008 | Report this comment

An opinion column is an OPINION column for a reason. So many people are making a big deal out of one OPINION. If you don't agree with it, don't read it. Yahya has been an opinion columnist for the IDS for a while now. It isn't as though he only sent in one "bigoted" column. IU is a liberal, open campus that welcomes free thinking and individuality. For all of those claiming "IU has lost credibility," you're wrong: in my eyes, allowing someone to express themselves and their opinion is what higher education is all about.

Posted by C. at 10:51 AM on Oct 31, 2008 | Report this comment

The person identifying themselves as "an IDS staffer" could be anyone, just like I could claim to be Leonardo Da Vinci. It's pretty sad that Mr(s). "used to love, now hate" accepts that their claim. Al-Jazeera also was not founded by the BBC, it's supported by the ruling family of Qatar.

Posted by I loved IU, now hate IU at 10:15 AM on Oct 31, 2008 | Report this comment

woooooooooooooooow, the IDS needs to look at their staff. Hamas and Hezbollah are acceptible forms of government? Woooooooooooow is all I have say. HAHAHAHA, I cannot believe some people. Why don't you go join their cause then and see how long you last before you are killed or asked to blow yourself up. And look to when the BBC was started and how anti-semetic they were. The IDS has lost all credibility, especially with a "IDS staffer" claiming that Hamas and Hezbollah are acceptible forms of government. I don't know what else to say except I feel for you. I am sorry that you were probably raised in foundation of hate. I mean seriously, how can someone make those comments with a straight face. You sound like some of these Arabs who are brain-washed from day 1 to hate Israel. You are like one of these 3 year olds you see on youtube.com that are learning how to shoot guns and are being taught to only kill jews. How you ever got into a institution of higher learning is beyond me. But I can obviously see now why the IDS has employed you. Hate, Anti-semetism, Anti-zionism, pro-terrorist (Hamas and Hezbollah are terrorist organizations), and pro dictatorship. I didn't know people in this country werent for democracy, but were for dictatorship where one man has rule. You are obviously a foreign exchange student from the middle-east. You give your land a bad name. Again, I say, I feel sorry for you.

Posted by jmlorch at 10:14 AM on Oct 31, 2008 | Report this comment

Furthermore, I think you need to hone down your 'argument' and decide if you're opposed to Zionism- which in its modern sense is a secular ideology by nature, or if you're opposed to a state governed entirely by Jewish law- which Israel is not. If you believe aid to Israel should be stopped because of corruption in the government and because Israel's leaders "deride its founding principles"- in which case money given when those principles were intact should not be a bad thing, or are you inherently opposed to the notion of a state for Jews? I am in favor of having even unpopular and disagreeable opinions in the IDS, and legitimate criticism of Israel would be okay with me, but it has to come from a legitimate place, and it has to be supported with real facts and not just skewed numbers and fuzzy math.

Posted by jmlorch at 10:14 AM on Oct 31, 2008 | Report this comment

In addition to the quote from Avraham Burg that was- at best- poorly cited, there is a completely unattributed quote earlier in the article: “'finely honed techniques of defamation, slander and intimidation.'” I Googled this and found it to be from Noam Chomsky in 1991. We as readers should not have to do this checking. By the way, Avraham Burg cannot be called "Israeli leaders" since he's ONE individual. That's just one more interesting framing of fuzzy math, like your numbers for financial aid given to Israel over a 50 year span, including the first years of the country's existence! Your calculation of the total U.S. dollars per Israeli is confusing, since it puts Israel's population at about 9.2 million- nearly 2 million higher than it is. Also, with birth rates and death rates and immigration, I don't know how can know exactly how many Israelis there have been during those nearly 50 years. Lastly, I believe if you were concerned about American taxpayers as you claim to be you would cite the amount of money each American has forked out. Granted, this statistic is not a legitimate one over a 50 year span given birth rates and death rates, etc. You betray an alternative agenda which is not pro-America but just anti-Israel. Otherwise, you would frame your shoddy financial 'stats' in terms of American loss and not Israeli gain.

Posted by IU Alum at 10:0 AM on Oct 31, 2008 | Report this comment

The title of this article is "Praise for anti-zionism." Are you kidding me? This editiors note? This is the IdS's retraction? You say that this article was published to create debate on the US-Israeli policy. What are you guys talking about? Why wasn't the article titled "Is Israeli policy flawed?" Or something along those lines. You don't even have to read the article to know that "Praise to Anti-Zionism" is hateful speech. I have no problem discussing US-Israeli Policy or the Arab-Israeli conflict, but this article is tastless and disgusting, and the IDS should be ashamed of themselves after all the backlash, this was the best retraction you could come up with. I feel sorry for all of you that you actually believe in these slanted views. Absolutely Unbelievable that one could find ways to defend this. Unbelievable!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Posted by C. at 4:50 AM on Oct 31, 2008 | Report this comment

It's interesting to note the frequency of equally bigoted replies to this sloppy, poorly written column. Such replies say all that one needs to know about their authors. It's also interesting to note how formulaic most of the criticisms are, even those that accuse the column author of using "talking points."

Posted by C. at 4:41 AM on Oct 31, 2008 | Report this comment

I'd be willing to bet that those here throwing around "Al-Jazeera," cannot actually understand anything being discussed on the channel, and, instead, are throwing around tired accusations once favored by the likes of Donald Rumsfeld. It's interesting when these same people are the ones criticizing the columnist, whose column is indeed incredibly sloppy and unconvincing, for not knowing what he's talking about. Second, the tired claim that "anti-Zionism is anti-Semitism" is on its face false. One cannot agree with Zionism as a political ideology and still not be prejudiced or hostile to Jews as a people. The claim presumes, falsely, that all Jews are Zionists and all Zionists are Jews.

Posted by Concerned and Saddened at 12:21 AM on Oct 31, 2008 | Report this comment

I am not a student of your university, but I do have friends who attend IU and brought this article to my attention. This author was clearly trying to get a reaction, and succeeded; and in doing so brought out the best and the worst in this campus. You have the strong Jewish population and their forward-thinking friends, many of whom have been to Israel and seen the amazing country that it is, and the ignorant, hateful students on campus who want freedom and peace for everyone who agrees completely with them. It's clear the author has no grip on reality, let alone the issues. This renders the author a non-entity, as irrelevant as any other raving, bigoted loon shouting obscenities at Jews or Israel. What saddens me is the agreement of others on campus, regardless of their being the minority, who (most likely silently) harbor hatred and bigotry toward Israel and Jews. And please don't kid yourselves-anti-Zionism IS anti-Semitism, it just sounds more politically correct.

Posted by Am Yisrael Chai at 7:22 PM on Oct 30, 2008 | Report this comment

Let's make something clear folks. Anti-Zionism doesn't equal anti-Semitism. HOWEVER... Anti-Zionism is often used as a way for anti-Semites to mask their racist sentiments. There is nothing wrong with criticizing the Israeli government, hell, Israelis are some of the most critical people in the world when it comes to calling out one's government. When "anti-Zionists" call out Israel as the prime example of a human rights violator, they are clearly an anti-Semite. Israel offers its Arab minority representation in the Knesset, allows it to appeal to the Israeli Supreme Court, own property, vote, and voice their opinions freely in a state that protects freedom of speech on both sides of the conflic. There is much more to be said in defense of Israel, but I quite frankly don't have the time in my daily life to do that, and I don't honestly believe I'll convert any non-believers. That being said, I still find anti-Zionism to be a detestable thought, but I can understand how the cheapened, unsourced Internet "information" has blinded so many impressionable individuals.

Posted by disgusted at 6:26 PM on Oct 30, 2008 | Report this comment

the author of this article is absolutely ignorant. to have the "chutzpah" to print something like this says a lot about who you are and the limited capacity in your head.

Posted by alum at 6:26 PM on Oct 30, 2008 | Report this comment

I would bet that this author is voting for obama

Posted by Daniel Cohen at 5:51 PM on Oct 30, 2008 | Report this comment

Look at the website the author got his information from: http://www.wrmea.com/ The background of the site is the palestinian flag! It's one thing for someone to criticize Israel, but his entire article is a perfect example of the bullshit and lies people use for propaganda purposes. What astonishes me is that this Chaudhry guy is so brainwashed in his own bigotry despite living in a country where there is freedom of information....He is just as blind to reality as people living in countries with State-run media (i.e. Saudi Arabia, Iran, Syria, Egypt, Gaza/West Bank, N. Korea). He must rely on Al-Jazeera for his daily news.

Posted by sarabano at 5:39 PM on Oct 30, 2008 | Report this comment

I think it's sad how by voicing my opinion here I am being judged as a biased propaganda spouting anti-Semite. Yet, I did nothing to say that your opinions were worthless. I was sympathetic and understanding to your perspectives and will not waste time responding to those who are close-minded and unwilling to have a constructive discussion about the topic at hand.

Posted by jmlorch at 5:36 PM on Oct 30, 2008 | Report this comment

Let's all play fair. Talking about the writer making bombs or cheering at 9/11 are not arguments and they have no place here. This is an emotional topic for many people, but there is no need for name-calling. Having said that, I think there are plenty of reasons this article is in poor taste and reflects poorly on the IDS. Any copy-editor should pick up an unattributed quote, and even a high school copy editor should pick up on the difference between principal and principle. More than that, an editor who cares should push for more than this from any journalist on any level. The numbers are skewed and don't make much sense, and the way quotes are used, misused, and unattributed betrays an agenda that is not free speech or protecting America. Lastly, arguments should be made for or against ideas, not people. There is room for legitimate criticism of Israel, just as there is plenty of room to criticize this article, but let's hold ourselves to that legitimate standard- unlike the writer.

Posted by Ha at 5:32 PM on Oct 30, 2008 | Report this comment

no their intent? I bet you think Al Jazeera TV is an unbiased and fair news source. You are a product of your own propoganda.

Posted by sarabano at 5:30 PM on Oct 30, 2008 | Report this comment

Also, my post below is refering to "Screw the IDS" specifically.

Posted by sarabano at 5:28 PM on Oct 30, 2008 | Report this comment

I can understand how Yahya's comments would be offensive to the Jewish community, however looking at the broader context of the article it becomes clear that this was not their intent. The purpose of the article was definitely to provide a perspective on Zionism. Even with the comment about God, the article does not have an anti-Semitic bias. The religious reference may have been in bad taste however, I feel your response is immature. Telling people to make bombs is ridiculous. You are propagating hate. It is easy to become upset when such comments are made, trust me I am Muslim so I have been in this boat before. Yet, I think it would be more appropriate to simply inform the author that their comment was offensive (as others before have done) than sit here spouting hateful words. Your comments are in just as bad taste as you believe Yahya's are.

Posted by Clarification at 5:25 PM on Oct 30, 2008 | Report this comment

I agree that there is a difference between an anti-zionist and an anti-semite but where this article crossed that threshold was when he threw the classless line about jewish people being the "chosen people." That is anti-semetism at its most fundamental state.

Posted by daniel at 5:10 PM on Oct 30, 2008 | Report this comment

this is not racist. It is a political view. Antizionist, not antisemitic

Posted by screw the IDS at 5:1 PM on Oct 30, 2008 | Report this comment

To Sarabono -- response number 55 Please tell me how this is not anti-semetism at its best. "Anyway, if Jews really are God’s chosen people, then the Jewish state of Israel does not need American support. Israel has a monopoly on God. Who would go against Him?" He also mocks us by using the word "Chutzpah" which is a hebrew word that only jews use, having nothing to do with a Zionist state. I feel sorry for you too Sarabono, as you are obviously anti-semetic as well. Why don't you go have fun with yaya or yoyo or whatever his name is and go make some bombs.

Posted by sarabano at 4:52 PM on Oct 30, 2008 | Report this comment

Anti-Zionism does not equal anti-Semitism and honestly the article says nothing to combine the two in any way.

Posted by Not a fan of IU at 4:18 PM on Oct 30, 2008 | Report this comment

I have already taken down my diploma from IU in my office. I will never give another dollar. I will never tell anyone again for as long as I live that I am an IU graduate. Screw all of you bigoted writers at the IDS. You have now all been branded for life as an anti-semite. Israel has the highest university degrees in the world per capita, Israel has the largest number of start-up companies per capita, Israel has the third largest number of companies listed on the NASDAQ, Israel's 100 billion dollar economy is larger than all its neighbors combined, Israel is the only liberal democracy in the middle east, Israel is the largest immigrant-absorbing nation per capita, Israel developed the first instrumentation for Breast cancer, Israel invented the first ingestible video camera used for surgeries, Voice mail was developed in Israel, the Pentium chip was developed at Intel-Israel, AOL insant messenger was developed by Israel. These are just some of the things that were developed by Israel, but I guess those are bad things, right? Ya, Death to Israel, that would be real smart. Lets give up the land to the Arab countries! How have they ever bettered the world. Oh I forgot, 9/11, what a great accomplishment. The IDS is garbage.

Posted by Scott 88' at 4:10 PM on Oct 30, 2008 | Report this comment

As an American, I believe Mr./Ms. Chaudhry has the right to his/her opinion. However, I would say as an alumni of this revered institution, I am embarassed and upset the editorial staff would allow this racist, anti-semitic and completely inaccurate assessment of our government and our government's relationship with Israel into our student paper. Let us not forget the great USA was formed by people in search of religious freedom. The relationship with Israel is as important, if not more important, for the US than Israel.

Posted by Not surprised at 3:49 PM on Oct 30, 2008 | Report this comment

The IDS is notorious for printing total rubbish. Are all of you really surprised by this nonsense? Just stop reading it and let them dwindle away. The IDS makes the University look bad and if possible, makes the whole backwards state of Indiana look bad. To the editor who allowed this article to be printed, commendations you are truly a moron. As for the genius who wrote this article, go home.

Posted by Ricky G. at 3:11 PM on Oct 30, 2008 | Report this comment

Yahya I feel sorry for you as you spew the big lie without knowing the facts. It just so happens that there is only one country in the Middle East that would allow you to publish an anti-government and hateful essay.That is Israel.Where do you think you be if you wrote this trash in Iran or Saudia Arabia ? Perhaps your energies should be more focused more on why almost all the Arabs in Arab countries live in abject poverty, while so few live by different rules in their massive palaces.Or perhaps you should ask why these countries have horrendous literacy rates or treat their women worse than their camels and goats. Your type of hate has done nothing to further the lives of your brothers and sisters. Perhaps if you worked WITH,not against,the people and government of Israel, the Arab countries in the Mid East would be able to acheive in 5 years what it has taken Israel 60 years. By the way, the next time you or a family member uses a cell phone check out where your battery was developed or if they need a CAT Scan ,check out where it was developed-you would be surprised.

Posted by Jenna at 2:47 PM on Oct 30, 2008 | Report this comment

I am a fan of the IDS, but not dumbass anti-semetic people who write poorly researched and completely biased articles like this one.

Posted by L. Berger at 2:46 PM on Oct 30, 2008 | Report this comment

It is truly remarkable that an article like this was even considered to be published and the author of the column was not barred from ever being able to submit writing for the IDS. Opinion aside, there is nothing factual about the article. It is pure hatred. It is pure anti-semitism at a time where there are far more important issues to discuss and write about. This proves how discredited the student body who run the IDS are by even allowing an individual to write for such a newspaper. I just spoke with the Editor-in Chief and she did not even read over this article prior to it being published nor could give any real reason as to why the Opinion Editors thought this to be a good article to publish. How can crazed anit-semitism be allowed in a setting like this? The ironic part is that the Jewish community at IU is badgered more than any other group of individuals yet the Jews have yet to respond in any negative way whatsoever. If that had been a racist article directed at Senator Obama, I could only imagine the upheaval that would have caused. I hope for the sake of this university and the credibility of this newspaper, a retraction statement is made and printed immediately in response to this rude, outlandish, and purely anti-semetic article.

Posted by a guy at 2:31 PM on Oct 30, 2008 | Report this comment

But seriously, I don't think this guy is anti-Semitic, just anti-Zionist. You can separate the two.

Posted by Student at 2:29 PM on Oct 30, 2008 | Report this comment

Did obama put you up to this.....or was it one of his jew or israel hating friends..... A vote for obama is like a vote to the death of Israel. Let us examine the situation. Would you want another neville chamberlain a.k.a Obama.....or a winston Churchill....A.K.A. McCain. We have tried appeasement...it led to 6 million less jews which lead to less inventions and less cures for diseases. I will choose Churchill/McCain and I hope all Jews do the same.

Posted by Daniel Cohen at 1:21 PM on Oct 30, 2008 | Report this comment

There is a passage from my friend Natan Sharansky's book titled "Defending Identity" that helps describe the nature of this op-ed: "To make sense of the unique hostility toward Israel in an age when the likes of Kim Jong-il and Mahmoud Ahmadinejad roam the earth, one must take a different view. One must see the Jewish state as singularly evil, a near-satanic force that undermines the peace and tranquility of the world and must be eliminated. There is a name for such a view. It is what historian Robert Wistrich has called the longest hatred in the world: anti-Semitism." I am disappointed that my alma-mater's newspaper would stoop to the level of publishing such a bigoted and acutely-false article. The IDS might as well allow Hamas and Hezbollah to publish articles in the IU paper, because Chaudhry sure sounds like their proxy.

Posted by JEW at 12:10 PM on Oct 30, 2008 | Report this comment

This is terrible. It is very clear that people at IU hate jews and Israel. Things will only get worse if Obama gets elected

Posted by Aaron at 12:8 PM on Oct 30, 2008 | Report this comment

This is not surprising that the IDS published this article. It is a liberal education institution. More importantly, they should have been covering WHY all these associations of Barack Obama are not getting coverage. Yahya Chaudhry is most likely a exchange student WHO CAME TO AMERICA TO UTILIZE OUR EDUCATIONAL INSTITUTIONS BECAUSE IN THEIR COUNTRY THEY ARE PROSECUTED. IF YOU DONT LIKE US POLICY LEAVE

Posted by VERYoffended at 12:3 PM on Oct 30, 2008 | Report this comment

This article is anti-semitic and IDS should issue an apology to the Jewish community for having run this. The author spews hate, in a poorly thought-out, wordy, and completely unsupported, hateful diatribe. This is a new low for the IDS.

Posted by Anti-Hate at 10:35 AM on Oct 30, 2008 | Report this comment

This column is only making things worse, there was no benefit in writing this. Look at how much hate and unrest this has created. Yahya, I bet you are the most hated person on campus right now.

Posted by Concerned Parent at 9:58 AM on Oct 30, 2008 | Report this comment

I'm genuinely concerned why the paper has not yet printed an apology or a retraction yet. I think a lawsuit may be in order...

Posted by Proud Jew at 9:16 AM on Oct 30, 2008 | Report this comment

Even if you want to ignore the obvious anti-Semitism in this column, Israel serves practical purposes for the US. Israel is great for proxy wars and economic development. The aid is negligible in the grand scheme of things.

Posted by Israel Forever! at 8:2 AM on Oct 30, 2008 | Report this comment

Dershowitz himself responded to this anti-Semite smut! http://www.idsnews.com/news/story.aspx?id=64040&comview=1&sc=1#comment

Posted by Free Thinker at 7:58 AM on Oct 30, 2008 | Report this comment

But let's ask a serious question: is ant-Zionism = anti-Semitism? I don't think so. Let's just take it easy and think this through.

Posted by Im surprised at 3:4 AM on Oct 30, 2008 | Report this comment

I am pretty offended by this article. Granted I am a Jew, but how did something like this get published? I know this complaint seems to be redundant, but someone made the argument of this being published in a place of "higher learning". Well in that case, IU just lost a whole lot of credibility in my eyes. I am an Illinois graduate, and I know that U of I is traditionally more conservative than IU, but even so, this totally biased and ignorant article would never be published. This being allowed to be published seems to be Indiana's newspaper waving their flag of free speech with disregard to the legitimacy of the article. It IS anti-semetic, especially their closing argument and as an earlier commenter said "shameless" how they used Yiddish in the article. I am truly surprised that a campus like Indiana with a prominent jewish population allowed this... I just hope that the campus responded.

Posted by Someone Thoughtful at 1:17 AM on Oct 30, 2008 | Report this comment

Wake up people. The legacy of Israeli influence in America is long. Many, now and in the past, have tried to stifle legitimate criticism of Israel accusing writers of being "anti-semitic." Check out the paper that started it all by two distinguished Harvard and University of Chicago Professors: The Israel Lobby and U.S. Foreign Policy http://ksgnotes1.harvard.edu/Research/wpaper.nsf/rwp/RWP06-011

Posted by Resign Now at 12:45 AM on Oct 30, 2008 | Report this comment

Anti-Semites should have no place to discuss their diabolic plots, including opinion columns. Resign now!

Posted by Angry Student at 7:48 PM on Oct 29, 2008 | Report this comment

I feel that this staff writer should be fired and reprimanded for his intolerant ignorant article.

Posted by Chayel b'Yisrael at 10:55 AM on Oct 29, 2008 | Report this comment

Kol yisrael arvm zeh vzeh-all of Israel must look out for each other. I am an IU Alum and now serving in the IDF. It's unfortunate to see this hatred runs through IU's student population. This disgusting portrayal of Palestinian propaganda only reinforced my mission as an Israeli solider and a Jewish American. The Jewish people and the state of Israel will continue to thrive WITH the alliance of America behind us and despite the ignorance of a misinformed sophomore anti-semite.

Posted by William Pollack at 10:10 AM on Oct 29, 2008 | Report this comment

Israel is America's only friend in the Middle East. This writer is insanely ignorant and void of historical fact. His comments derive from the Hamas, Hezbolla and Syrian talking points. It is ashame we have his oily ilk in our beautiful free nation. Israel was created by a UN mandate and was immediately attacked by her Arab neighbors seeking the Jewish State's destruction. Every war fought hence, was perpetrated and initiated by Arab dictatorial nations against the tiny miraculous democracy known as Israel. Israel is the most advanced, progressive nation in that part of the world. The fact that Arabs embrace terrorism, slavery and have reduced women to mere rubble in their despicable societies is not reason to verbally assault and hope for an end to America's mutually beneficial support for Israel. The benefits are so vast is would take weeks to show how American security has been massively emboldened due to Israeli cooperation. If Jews are the Chosen People and do not need Israel, as this morally bankrupt writer suggests, then explain the Holocaust.

Posted by Roster Head at 9:45 AM on Oct 29, 2008 | Report this comment

An Ant-Zionist Jew: Reread your history. The Jews have been in Palestine for eons. During WWI, the British government proposed a Jewish state in Palestine until the Arabs began to clamor and threaten to impose on the Economic exploitation of the Middle East by the Brits. The Brits then began to aid the Arabs in systematic terrorism of the Jews until the UN established post WWII voted to give Palestine to the Jews for a state. (Hey isn't the organization you all wanted Bush to support?) Britain still aided the Arabs by inhibiting emigration of the Jews from Europe in hopes that the foundering Jewish state would collapse to the Arab onslaught. The Jews have always run a non-secular state. It just so happens that the only ones who want to participate in the Civic Duties of Israel are the Jews (Generalized Statement) Arabs have the right to franchise, own property, and live were they choose.

Posted by An Ant-Zionist Jew at 9:24 AM on Oct 29, 2008 | Report this comment

I agree with this column. Any country defined by religion is inherently wrong. This country must and does discriminate against ethnic minorities. This is unacceptable. I know some will argue that the middle-east is made up of Muslim nations, but Israel as a jewish state is completely unnatural. If the jews wanted a place to live, they should have carved out a state in Germany after WWII, when sympathy was high.

Posted by Roster Head at 9:12 AM on Oct 29, 2008 | Report this comment

Viva La Free Speech, I agree that this gentleman has a right to write what he likes. I would just like editors to do their job and help the author better research vice cutting and pasting from other web articles. I would like the editors to temper inflammatory comments from being published. If you want his free speech protected, where is the White Supremacy Nazi Skin Head columns? Basically this kid said that Obama should not hide his anti Zionist feelings and bring Jesse Jackson back into the fold. Racism and religious intolerance is rampant in this article. Anti Zionist does not equate to anti-Jewish state. Last, why can't there be a Jewish state. The rest of the States in the Middle East are Muslim.

Posted by paul at 6:14 AM on Oct 29, 2008 | Report this comment

Viva le free speech, it's amazing to me that you support free speech unless it comes in the form of a critical opinion expressed by a Jew towards an anti-semitic article. It IS anti-semitic to claim as this article does that Jewish dissent is meant to stifle opinion and that the "label" antisemite is not meant as a serious charge of racism but rather to silence critics. Jimmy Carter's book was criticized because its title attempted to deceive audiences by misconstruing the concept of apartheid to merely mean separation rather than race-based exclusion. There was no Jewish conspiracy to silence Jimmy Carter or delegitimize him as we don't sit down together and have formalized discussions but rather act as individuals. This article is NOT an attack on Judaism, but rather an attack on the Jewish right to self-determination that basically accuses American Jews of conspiratorial behavior.

Posted by Paul at 6:6 AM on Oct 29, 2008 | Report this comment

Let's start with the aggregate tax payer total that this author cites in order to make Israel sound like a drain on U.S taxpayers (this is a deceptive and dishonest way to represent taxpayer burden). Israel receives about 3 billion dollars a year in taxpayer money. Some might argue that this isn't a strategic benefit but this is hardly a drain on a ten plus trillion dollar economy. I believe Egypt gets 2 billion a year in aid. You tell me what's the better value? Also compare this with the 300 billion in assets of Jews expropriated by Arab regimes that expelled them and you see that it is hardly propping up the state. Also the tactic of citing one Jew's critical opinion of Israel and holding it up as an example of Jewish "perniciousness" is a tried and true anti-semitic rhetorical technique. No wonder this article, as afactual and ahistorical as can be written is produced by an antisemite at a third tier university. Have fun being mediocre.

Posted by Vive Le Free Speech at 12:47 AM on Oct 29, 2008 | Report this comment

reading these comments, i can't believe some of things that have been written against this writer. this is a center of higher thinking, let's be a little more mature in our responses. everyone needs to look past their own religious convictions and realize that this writer is NOT being anti-semitic in his criticisms. this is not an attack on the jewish faith, but rather the idea of a jewish state. are we so blinded by faith that we resort to maliciously slander those with opposing views? we have a constitutional right to voice our opinions, and kudos to both the writer and the IDS for having the audacity to publish a piece on such a provocative topic. do the research, get informed, then make an assertion. don't just regurgitate what your religious leaders, political figures, and TV tell you.

Posted by MagenYisrael at 11:9 PM on Oct 28, 2008 | Report this comment

“Anyway, if Jews really are God’s chosen people, then the Jewish state of Israel does not need American support. Israel has a monopoly on God. Who would go against Him?” If he is not anti-Semitic then the author should take this same stance with every group of people that believes in a personal Gd of some sort (which is most, if not nearly every civilization in the history of the world). Both Christians and Muslims believe that Israel lost its covenant with Gd, and that they gained it, thus becoming “Gd’s chosen people.” Should we then not worry about the people in Darfur because their Gd should take care of them? Should we not worry about any Christians, Muslims, or any number of religious people around the world who find themselves persecuted and massacred? Following the author’s logic we should let them suffer and die because they believe that Gd cares about them and will save them, therefore they do not need our help. Or does this only apply to Jews? This seems not only ridiculous, but also staggeringly immoral. The author obviously let his dislike for the Jewish people get in the way of his critique of governmental policy, which should not have been tolerated by the IDS, even in an opinion section.

Posted by arnesto at 10:13 PM on Oct 28, 2008 | Report this comment

This is a pro- palestinian propaganda writer. Read it with his bias unmasked. THIS BIS HIS HOME FORUM http://www.bdsmovement.net/

Posted by K at 6:57 PM on Oct 28, 2008 | Report this comment

I agree with the author's point that America may spend too much money on Israel, however, the author's final two paragraphs take away any validity in his arguments. How would taking away money from our soul ally in the Middle East save America's "Moral Soul"? This is an interesting comment from a person who is known to make obvious anti-Semitic remarks.

Posted by Some Sense at 6:39 PM on Oct 28, 2008 | Report this comment

Finally! someone understands how the Jewish-Israeli lobby has hijacked the American political system and financial systems. Good job!

Posted by anotherpointofview at 6:35 PM on Oct 28, 2008 | Report this comment

if you think about it, without the US backing israel, they'd have virtually no allies and no way to achieve their end goal which is PEACE. the US allows israel to work on developing as a country as well as a presence in the world. come on yahya.

Posted by future rabbi at 6:30 PM on Oct 28, 2008 | Report this comment

as someone who has both been to israel and has many many friends who live there, serve in the army, I am proud to say that I live in the US where Israel is supported! i am studying there next year, and without the support of the US, I, along with many other college students would be without the amazing experience provided!! Yahya, go to israel, talk to israelis, talk to americans who have been. then re-write your column.

Posted by Support Israel! at 5:39 PM on Oct 28, 2008 | Report this comment

resign and redeem yourself, anything less and you'll be branded an anti-Semite for the rest of your life.

Posted by Rob Steinberg at 5:3 PM on Oct 28, 2008 | Report this comment

damn, the writer even used the word "chutzpah" to sound jewish! shameless

Posted by Jon at 3:9 PM on Oct 28, 2008 | Report this comment

I am an IU alumnus and currently a rabbinic student studying in Jerusalem. The sad truth is that the opinion expressed in this article is shared with many others. I read the posts ahead of me and it gives me great pride to see most of the responses have not been as malicious as the article. Israel is not perfect. There are problems. There are radicals on both sides that have derailed the path to peace. It is important that not only Jews but Americans have a vested interest in this issue. Peace, as distant as it may seem, is a possibility in this beautiful land. The way to achieve it is through understanding and reasoning; not by preaching hate and intolerance.

Posted by lifelong zionist at 2:44 PM on Oct 28, 2008 | Report this comment

"Anyway, if Jews really are God's Chosen People, then the Jewish state of Israel does not need American support." ...sounds anti-semitic to me. i am disgusted.

Posted by Jay at 1:56 PM on Oct 28, 2008 | Report this comment

DESPICABLE

Posted by Ben Kerler at 1:48 PM on Oct 28, 2008 | Report this comment

You should be fired, the IDS has lost touch with reality. If the editors had a soul, they would fire you. And then, they should apologize!

Posted by L at 1:41 PM on Oct 28, 2008 | Report this comment

You lose a good bit of your credibility since we know you to be vocally anti-Semitic.

Posted by thatguy at 1:25 PM on Oct 28, 2008 | Report this comment

Two points: One, for those of you who think that Israel is just out to kill all the Palestinians; if Israel truly wanted to destroy the Palestinian people like you suggest, wouldn't they have done it by now? This is absurd. And second, is anyone forgetting that when the Palestinian people were given democracy and the right to choose a leader they elected Hamas, a terrorist organization into power!

Posted by Jimmy C at 1:24 PM on Oct 28, 2008 | Report this comment

Ah, I found Burg's speech entitled: "The end of Zionism" here it is: http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2003/sep/15/comment Pretty damning for Israel.

Posted by gos at 10:38 AM on Oct 28, 2008 | Report this comment

Contrary to the flame you're receiving here, I completely agree with you. I especially like how the only time we, as American voters, have been able to see any in depth discussion on the issue came at an AIPAC convention. (Oh gee, I wonder what the candidates are gonna say?) Not expecting any bias there is as likely as not hearing any when candidates deliver speeches on gun control at a NRA conventions. This issue hasn't had a fair discussion, but has gotten plenty of people emotional.

Posted by Jimmy C at 10:19 AM on Oct 28, 2008 | Report this comment

What about the fiscal cost to the US? it's not worth it.

Posted by AntiNeoFascist at 9:40 AM on Oct 28, 2008 | Report this comment

I'm curious how Israel is supposedly an apartheid state when it not only allows Palestinians to own land, businesses, and to vote, but to hold public office as well.

Posted by Roster Head at 9:29 AM on Oct 28, 2008 | Report this comment

Edge, if you read the Wikipedia articles the author cut and pastes from, you would realize that your statements are untrue. Look to the persecution of the Jews in Israel by the Arabs from the end of WWI till the time the state of Israel was formed. The Jews have had to fight for their very existence against Arabs supported by the British. Those leaders the article quotes are looking for ways to co-exist with the Arabs in their lands. Arab suicide bombings are not a recent phenomenon; they have been doing it to the Jews since the end of WWI when the Jews first looked for a place to found a Jewish state. The Jews have offered the Palestinians a place in the democratic process but have been rebuffed at every attempt because the Palestinians won't rest until the Jordan River runs red with Jewish Blood... I remember a Palestinian leader saying something to that effect.

Posted by edge at 6:20 AM on Oct 28, 2008 | Report this comment

Most people attacking your article have a vested interest in the issue. They are either jewish or evangelists supporting the zionist movement for total control of all Palestine by Israel. There is proof beyond any doubt that Israel is firmly intent, with the help of US support, both political and financial (half of US foreign aid goes directly or indirectly to Israel), on evicting all Palestinians from their native land. Those, who refuse to discuss this issue, like Roster Head, are the real hate mongers here, since they prefer to let a century old conflict remain unresolved. Refusal to discuss is the only cause of continued hate and violence.

Posted by alumni in ohio at 4:11 AM on Oct 28, 2008 | Report this comment

Now now everyone... I think this guy should be encouraged to speak his mind. If that happens, then everyone will see how ridiculous it is to bash our only true ally in the Middle East and a county that is fighting the same war against terrorism that we are. Yay for free spech and for another pro-Palestinian sounding like an idiot!

Posted by Stoner at 1:41 AM on Oct 28, 2008 | Report this comment

It looks as if you did your research on Wikipedia. Great journalism. I just googled your sources and boy did your article look like a Wikipedia entry. Keep up the good work. If we become anti zionists, is it acceptable to be anti muslem? What about Asian, African ...? Keep your hate to yourself!

Posted by Roster Head at 1:34 AM on Oct 28, 2008 | Report this comment

Wow, the alcoholic editor allowed this poorly written piece of inflammatory material to be published? The American investment into the State of Israel has been critical to ensuring America's presence in the Middle East. Don't be fooled by the slant of a pro Palestinian writer who obviously has not tempered his pros with well articulated arguments. Instead, we get his passionate statements of hate and intolerance for Jews.


Email

Your Name: *
Your Email: *  
To Email: *  
Subject: IDSnews.com | Praise for anti-Zionism
Comments:
Verify image: Security Text



*