Jewicidal Tablet Claims My Pro-Israel Ad Is Actually …. Anti-Israel

Yes, and good is evil and evil is good. That is the morally inverted state of the "civilized" world. Tablet magazine, a little-read and even less well-known website, fashions itself as a "daily online magazine of Jewish news, ideas, and culture." Yes, the "online magazine of Jewish news, ideas, and culture" is calling my fiercely pro-Israel ads …anti-Israel.

The Jewicidals are in a mad rush to disavow my pro-Israel ad. They aren't that pro-Israel. And first and foremost, do not offend the savages.

Pamela Geller’s New Ad Is Actually Anti-Israel by Adam Chandler, Tablet, August 15

Story continues below advertisement

(Atlas Shrugs)

First comes the self-indulgent personal narrative:

I went to college in Washington, D.C. during the height of the Second Intifada, which meant that the campus had a constant swirl of litter from both pro-Israel and anti-Israel groups. The Second Intifada was everywhere–on campus radio, in student newspapers, pasted on the walls, and chalked on the streets. Following a particularly bad series of events (and those years had plenty of them), graphic photographs of rubble, bombed out cafes, and innocent dead would greet students on their way out of classrooms.

I was, quite proudly, on the pro-Israel side of this circuit, which in hindsight probably killed more trees than changed minds. When another campus installed fake Israeli checkpoints to mock-harass students, the pro-Israel brigade rallied together and went there to sprawl out around like dead bodies, victims of those who’d been killed by suicide bombers. If you were engaged, you walked around campus constantly alert, looking for signs that had been graffitied or to graffiti them yourself, even sometimes tear them down.

I can’t begin to imagine what the majority of the student body–many of whom seemed politically agnostic on the topic of the Israeli-Palestinian Conflict–made of all this. From conversations I had (which were far more effective than all the sloganeering we did), I generally sensed that most people weren’t going to be swayed by all the histrionic stuff playing out on the campus square. Since it probably didn’t relate to them, it just annoyed them.

An example: I never saw a fraternity brother of mine more crestfallen than when a group of activists who were opposed to the building of Israel’s security fence (“Apartheid Wall” as they called it), formed a chain that split the student union in half, encumbering the path to Taco Bell. He was a carefree, Irish Catholic kid from New England and I’ll never forget what he said and he squeezed past a kid trying to hand him a flyer.

“I just want nachos, dude.”

Still awake? Finally we get to the point:

What brings this whole indulgent reverie back to mind is the news of an all-caps pro-Israel ad that debuted this week on buses in San Francisco. It reads:

In any war between the civilized man and the savage, support the civilized man.
Support Israel. Defeat Jihad.

Behind the ad is the American Freedom Defense Initiative, an organization led by the infamous Pamela Geller. Off the bat, it’s important to note that the ad is obviously flawed–it’s racist, clumsy, Orientalist, and stupid.

Really? What race are jihadist murders of innocent civilians? Why is it not only racist, but "clumsy, Orientalist, and stupid" to resist them? Isn't it clumsier and stupider, if not more "Orientalist," not to resist them, and to let them murder more innocents?

I can’t imagine anyone (especially anyone whose mind is not already made up) reading this ad and concluding anything other than “some parts of the pro-Israel lobby seem like a bunch of dicks.” I’m sure it’s doing a lot of good work in San Francisco.

The rush to assure the "Palestinian" jihadists that they are not savages amazes me. The targeting of civilians is savage. The relentless 60-year campaign of terror against the Jewish people is savage. The torture of hostage Gilad Shalit was savage. The bloody hacking to death of the Fogel family was savage. The Munich Olympic massacre was savage. The unspeakable torture of Ehud Goldwasser was savage. The tens of thousands of rockets fired from Gaza into southern Israel (into schools, homes, etc.) are savage. The vicious Jew-hatred behind this genocide is savage. The endless demonization of the Jewish people in the Palestinian and Arab media is savage. The refusal to recognize the state of Israel as a Jewish state is savage. The list is endless.

But philosophically, the ad is also so primitive, it actually contains an anti-Israel message. Support Israel = Defeat Jihad. This formula suggests that the battle against violent Islamic fundamentalism can be won solely by supporting Israel. I know well from my college years spent crafting hasbara that the very last thing a pro-Israel message should do is reduce terrorism to a battle fought solely between Israel and Islamic fundamentalists.

Chandler here commits a basic error: "This formula suggests that the battle against violent Islamic fundamentalism can be won solely by supporting Israel." Actually, no. This formula doesn't suggest that at all. It never says anything like "violent Islamic fundamentalism can be won solely by supporting Israel." It says that the defense of Israel is part of the defense against the global jihad. It suggests that Israel is on the front line of that jihad. But it does not suggest that "violent Islamic fundamentalism can be won solely by supporting Israel." Much more must be done as well. "Violent Islamic fundamentalism" must be opposed not only in Israel, but in Indonesia, the Philippines, Thailand, India, Pakistan, Iraq, Iran, Chechnya, Nigeria, etc.

Isolating Israel here leaves out a coalition of the aggrieved that includes America, Great Britain, Spain, India, and countless Arab and Muslim countries. Rhetorically, it would be easy to flip this ad and say that Israel is the reason for terrorism–a trope often uttered during the Second Intifada. It’s better that as many people as possible feel that Israel’s struggle against terrorism is also their struggle. Otherwise, you’re just keeping people from their nachos.

Chandler starts from a false premise and so it's no surprise that he comes to a false conclusion. No one is isolating Israel but him. My ad says that supporting Israel is supporting the counter-jihad. It never says that that is all the counter-jihad must do. Chandler's criticism is as out of focus as those who say that the ad targets Islam itself or all Muslims, although it mentions neither. Leftist dhimmi journalists are seeing in my ad what they want to see to support their own narrative, not what is really there.

The Truth Must be Told

Your contribution supports independent journalism

Please take a moment to consider this. Now, more than ever, people are reading Geller Report for news they won't get anywhere else. But advertising revenues have all but disappeared. Google Adsense is the online advertising monopoly and they have banned us. Social media giants like Facebook and Twitter have blocked and shadow-banned our accounts. But we won't put up a paywall. Because never has the free world needed independent journalism more.

Everyone who reads our reporting knows the Geller Report covers the news the media won't. We cannot do our ground-breaking report without your support. We must continue to report on the global jihad and the left's war on freedom. Our readers’ contributions make that possible.

Geller Report's independent, investigative journalism takes a lot of time, money and hard work to produce. But we do it because we believe our work is critical in the fight for freedom and because it is your fight, too.

Please contribute here.

or

Make a monthly commitment to support The Geller Report – choose the option that suits you best.

• $25.00 here
• $50.00 here
• $75.00 here
• $100.00 here
• $250.00 here

0 0 votes

Article Rating

12 Comments

Oldest

Newest Most Voted

Inline Feedbacks

View all comments

Gleaner1

11 years ago

ANY ad campaign that wacks the head of the nail as squarly as THIS one does is bound to create a stink. GOOD. Israel can be likened to a small open boat, somewhat overloaded and battered on all sides by a cruel and hostile sea of muslims.
All the crew need to do is pump out as much as they can, as fast as they can, and stop any more coming in, KIS.
Some folks seem a little TOO detatched from whats going on, i hope that changes.

0

Jamadagnii

11 years ago

What could be more “racist” and “Orientalist” than the bland acceptance by the rest of the civilized world of the savage suicide bombings that take place regularly in the Muslim world, Muslim against Muslim? Another suicide bombing in Iraq? Suicide bombings all over Afghanistan? Is Israel to blame for that too, even though it’s been going on for 1400 years? Where’s the outrage?
Heaven forbid someone should call savagery what it is.
Good on you, Pamela Geller.

0

armaros

11 years ago

Two points: The hissyfit over the term savage is somewhat expected.
We have dealt with this issue since 1948…or 1967 as some would say.
Either way, more than one generation has been hearing, hoping, wishing, thinking and pretending that this conflict will sort itself out like territorial disputes have in Europe and Asia.
It isn’t such a conflict and it is time to stop the charade.
In my interpretation Pamela used the term for a reason. It isn’t as if she didn’t think some would find it offensive.
Whatever one’s view might be on final settlement issues: Two states, Jordan or many states as some started to suggest, to split the Pals up into tribes, there has to be a common denominator. There has to be a basic understanding of the conflict.
That is to understand that one side is hell bent on exterminating, punishing and persecuting the other. No matter what means they choose to deploy, they all are with the intent to eliminate the Jewish state. The acts which defined the “struggle” are all, unfortunately savage acts. Form the sabotage incursions of the 50s and 60s to the hijackings and killings of Jews on cruise ships culminating with Passover suicide bombings, buses exploding and kids’ throats cut while they slept, the definition of the Palestinian MO is savagery. It is deliberate. It is to terrorize the other side and letting them know that they (The pals) are capable of things Jews would never imagine.
The savagery thus becoming the essence of their terrorism.
Are there “civilized” terrorists? Probably not really. But anybody with a brain can compare this with the IRA, the Basques, the anti government nuts etc… with a movement which trains, educates, acts and lionizes people who blow up children eating pizza.
That has to be called by its name. It doesn’t mean all Muslims or even all Pals. Pals also are victims of this savagery. The ones pushed off tall buildings in Gaza to the ones tortured to death by Hamas or the ones gang raped by Arafats thugs. They too suffer the same savagery.
The left loves to throw the assumption: “You mean all XYZ” when they even know that not to be the case.
The Tablets of this world had their 60+ years to argue their case and to advance their approach. What can they show for their brown nosing to Muslims and Palestinian “leaders”?
Because they have no argument they resort to their leftist tactics to smear and condemn for lack of political correctness. They then move onto pre blaming the other side by attributing the violence of the enemy to the expression itself. This why they called Pams ads “actually anti Israel”. Now Pams ads will be the cause of Palestinian rage (which never existed before) and Pam will cause peace to wait another decade.
PS
The Tablet posted worse things: They even attacked holocaust survivors as enemies of Jews.
http://frontpagemag.com/2012/mark-tapson/holocaust-survivors-as-villains-the-self-hatred-of-the-jewish-left/

0

Radegunda

11 years ago

“… it actually contains an anti-Israel message. Support Israel = Defeat Jihad…”
That’s at least two basic errors. One is to insert an “equals” sign where none is even implied. The ad presents “support Israel” and “defeat jihad” as complementary goals. Since “support Israel” comes first, a logical reading might be that “defeat jihad” is a necessary aspect of supporting Israel.
Second, let’s play along with Chandler and suppose it did equate the two, or that it meant (as he suggests), “support Israel and thereby defeat jihad without doing anything else about it”: That could be characterized as a naive view or an excessively Israelocentric view, but reading it as anti-Israel is too weird even to attempt to understand.
Adam Chandler = massive fail in logic.

0

John

11 years ago

It’s an easily understood ad:
Jews are civilized
Muslims are savages
easy peasy right?

0

Sujith

11 years ago

Pam,
It would be better to give the words “Support Israel defeat jihad ” a white
background when you roll out the next set of ads. It stands out better …..if this makes the leftists loons head explode so much the better.
It also makes ppl think about it …most don’t, otherwise. It important to run it
as long as it can be .
And don’t just let anyone make it jihad VS israel …..justify your stand by
how jihad is attack against all non muslim societies not just on jews since
last 1400 years. Most of the folks have been living a ignorant dhimmmi lives
they need to be woken up.
That’s the only way to safeguard any civilized society.
This will give it a broader appeal instead of it being bracketed as just another
pro israel advert.

0

alyn21

11 years ago

Since the ad does not mention muslims where does the racism apply? Unless you do not want to offend people who commit savage acts why should this ad make any difference to the sensibilities of the muslims and their dhimmi stooges.
I think the big problem for these twits is that the add supports Israel.
Am Yisroel Chai (The Nation of Israel Lives).
THERE IS NO PALESTINE.

0

Larry S.

11 years ago

From Adam Chandler’s article on tabletmag.com:
“the very last thing a pro-Israel message should do is reduce terrorism to a battle fought solely between Israel and Islamic fundamentalists.”
I find myself sympathetic to this argument, even though I’d quibble about the term “Islamic fundamentalists”. The wording of the AFDI ad suggests to Middle America that this is an “Israel vs. the Arabs” or “Israel vs. the jihadis” kind of thing- something with which we Americans needn’t concern ourselves. Readers of atlasshrugs know that’s a false idea.
As to the claim that advertisement is racist, I’d find that almost amusing if the issue weren’t so important. To claim the ad is racist seems to me to imply that murderous jihad is an inherent part of the “Arab race” (of course, there is no such thing). Isn’t that a rather racist point of view?

0

Studs Lonnigan

11 years ago

Little Adam Chandler, more woman than man, lives in a nice comfy dream land where nobody ever gets hurt. Lions roll in the grass and play with lambs. It never gets dark in little Adam’s world because that might scare people. It’s all milk and cookies for soft little Adam and all his friends bathing in the warm rays of diversity and cultural enrichment. If any anger ever arises, you take a timeout and all is better.
What a buttercup this fool is.

0

Laura

11 years ago

“Leftist dhimmi journalists are seeing in my ad what they want to see to support their own narrative, not what is really there”.
…………………………………………………………………..
The ad is like a rorschach test. The word muslim does not appear in the ad, yet liberals are the ones linking the word “savage” to islam. It reveals much in their own mindset. Despite their public proclamations of islam being a peaceful religion, they know in their own minds that this is not the case.

0

Asha108

11 years ago

At least the pro-Israel ad has ruffled some feathers and is gaining attention to your fantastic blog, Pamela. Many more people will now read your blog and see the truth of jihad for the first time, since mainstream media had been whitewashing “the religion(cult) of peace (death).

0

BethesdaDog

11 years ago

I did not see this article by Chandler when I linked to an article about Elvis supposed “Jewish roots,” on Tablet, in another thread.
I must apologize for linking to this apologetic rag, another typical and nauseating example of what passes for the “hip” new Jewish cyberculture.
These people want so badly to fit in with the larger culture, so they can only do it by distancing themselves from their heritage. How terrible that Israel’s supporters blocked the way to Taco Bell! How embarrassing!
What silliness!
Pamela’s explanation is compelling. Israel is indeed the canary in the coal mine of enlightened, western civilization. It is the forefront of the fight against medieval, backward militant Islamic fundamentalist savagery.
For those who are embarrassed by that fact, well too bad.
Pamela is perhaps the West’s single greatest champion for those oppressed, persecuted and murdered by the extremists in Islam. No one else, certainly not her critics like the ADL and SPLC, are doing the work she does, calling attention time and again to the oppression and brutality inflicted upon women by fundamentalist Islam, the persecution of minorities, like Christians and Bahai, the murder by terror of innocents, particularly women and children. The SPLC and ADL are busy attacking Pamela Geller, instead of doing the real work of protecting human rights. They’re missing in action. It’s a sorry sick world we will be living in if the mindset of SPLC and ADL gains ascendancy.

0