Joseph Massad, an associate professor at Columbia University, opines about Jewish suffering, Palestinian suffering.
...one should always stand with Jews as victims of European anti-Semitic violence and stand with Palestinians as victims of Jewish racist violence. There is no choice to be made between the two...
Actually, the Jews living in Germany were citizens who were contributing to the development of the country. They did not go around throwing stones at two-year-old toddlers, or conduct massacres on defenseless civilians, such as when 67 Jews were murdered in Hebron in 1929. The Jews did not send Katusha rockets towards German towns. There was no reason to conduct violent against Jews other than anti-Semitism. So, yes, there is a choice to be made between the two and one cannot mention Palestinian suffering without pointing to contributing factors such as weapons smuggling, rocket firing, stone throwing and Arab youths who commit acts of violence because they are motivated by hatred of Jews.
Incidentally, there are some elucidating comments posted at the end of the article. But, at the end of the day, people will stick to their opinions.
This morning ElderofZiyon posted about an article Michael Bell, another academic, had written regarding a rock attack on Daniel Seidemann. In the original article Bell wrote, "Given established patterns, however, the likely perpetrators are ultra-nationalist members of the settler movement."
In a subsequently amended article, he wrote, 'This time however those throwing stones were Palestinians."
A student named Christopher, who studied under the professor, opines about whether the original article's error was due to bias or ignorance.
Since the professor is so concerned about rock attacks, will he write an article or teach his students about an attack being reported in the Jersualem Post in which Arab youths were motivated by hatred of Jews?
Can someone tell me how many times Joseph Massad talks about Israel as a racist state in this video? How does one expect students to form rational opinions if only one side is being presented? It's like being presented with only one side of a dreidel!