BlueTruth

The San Francisco Jewish Film Festival Hosts Cindy Corrie: What's Wrong with This Moving Picture?

2009-07-14T14:03:00.000-07:00

The San Francisco Jewish Film Festival is no stranger to controversy. After a 2005 lineup featuring a host of anti-Israel films capped by Arna's Children , a number of Israel advocates (including this writer) met with Peter Stein, the executive director of the SFJFF and Nancy Fishman, the program director, to express our concerns. Although we were given the chance to express our concerns, we didn't think there was much of a hearing given to them. However, to our pleasant surprise, the next 3 SFJFF lineups were free of films that would have more properly been screened at an Arab film festival (as indeed Arna's Children had been shown at the 2004 San Francisco Arab film festival).This year, however, the SFJFF has chosen to screen "Rachel", a film examining the tragic death of Rachel Corrie, the young woman who was run over by an IDF bulldozer while trying to interfere with an anti-terrorist operation in the Gaza Strip. Her death has been exploited by anti-Israel groups and has become the subject of a controversial play "My Name is Rachel Corrie". But more than just showing the film itself (which was made by an Israeli filmmaker), the SFJFF has invited Cindy Corrie, Rachel's mother, to speak after the film. Cindy and her husband Craig have appeared at numerous events hosted by the International Solidarity Movement (the Palestinian-led "nonviolent" terror support network for which Corrie was volunteering) and other anti-Israel groups. The film festival organizers obviously knew that this was going to create controversy and they have pre-emptively put up a statement on their website-- which of course couches their decision in the language of artistic freedom and "democratic exchange of ideas" and "spirited debate". They do, appropriately, cite other films they are showing that do provide other perspectives on Israel's struggle against terror: "Gilad Shalit: Two Years in Captivity" and "Chronicle of a Kidnap" about Karnit Goldwasser, the widow of IDF solider Ehud Goldwasser who was kidnapped from Israel and subsequently killed by Hezbollah in 2006. But for the Corrie film , the only voice that will be heard is that of Cindy Corrie. What then, after all, is the sound of one person debating?

While the film itself, given its provenance in Israel, may be a defensible choice for the festival, the appearance of Cindy Corrie is not. The letter below summarizes the issue quote nicely (thanks to Art A. for allowing me to reprint his letter here). Please send your own comments (do NOT simply cut and paste: use your own words!) to Peter Stein at pstein@sfjff.org and Nancy Fishman at nfishman@sfjff.org. Keep in mind that after 2005, when approached with legitimate community concerns presented respectfully but honestly, the SFJFF did appear to be appropriately responsive.

Peter Stein & Nancy Fishman
San Francisco Jewish Film Festival
July 3, 2009
Re: Your Upcoming Rachel Corrie Event

You are advertising a film festival event this summer where you will show a movie on the topic of Rachel Corrie, and offer a speaking opportunity for Rachel Corrie's mother. I suspect that you now realize - perhaps belatedly - that this will be a political event, not an artistic one. It will be a one-sided anti-Israel propaganda piece disguised as theatre.

I have read the explanatory essay you provide accompanying the advertising of the event. Clearly you are aware of the sensitivity of this topic, but not sufficiently concerned. There will be no speaker at this event to provide the Israeli perspective on this situation. Even if there were, how can even a well-informed speaker compete with the drama of a propaganda film plus a heart-breaking speech by a mother that has lost her daughter? Will there be a discussion of the misinformation and training provided by ISM that led Rachel to place herself in harm's way?

Several comments in your essay are illuminating:1. You say about Rachel Corrie's mother: "Her appearance at SFJFF is not intended to provide a political platform but rather to deepen the dialogue around the film". Are you aware that Cindy Corrie is a favorite on the speaker circuit for anti-Israel hate groups? Groups like Sabeel love to present her. She does not present a balanced perspective on this topic, to say the least.
2. You say: "The filmmaker considers herself a film essayist rather than a reporter and desires the film to be viewed as an artistic statement as well as an investigation."You are saying that the filmmaker does not hold herself to the standards of accuracy of a reporter because this is an "artistic statement". Doesn't this suggest that you know this session is not going to be fair to Israel?
3. You say: "We ... want our audience to have the benefit of a direct encounter with those who can help them understand Rachel Corrie's motivations "even if they don't agree with them." Why? Do you know ANYONE who does not understand what Rachel was taught about Israel and why she was helping ISM block the IDF?
Bottom Line: It is not a secret that the purpose of the film "Rachel" is to demonize Israel, not to "deepen dialogue". The purpose of appearances by Rachel Corrie's mother is always to demonize Israel. The lack of a speaker to respond to the accusations ensures that this event will demonize Israel.
What to do now that you seem to be committed to this event? a. Find someone sharp, educated and well prepared to respond to the charges during the post session. Such a speaker should have seen the film in advance and be familiar with the substance of Cindy Corrie's stock presentation. b. Post or hand out flyers on the topic of Rachel Corrie found at: http://www.standwithus.com/app/flyers/flyerview.asp?wc=17
Given that this is a political event, not a "film festival" event, the question for you now is how to appear even handed. c. Carefully examine how this happened. Who on your staff or board advocated for a one-sided politically driven session?As you can imagine, I will not be able to support the film festival this year. Maybe I'll see you in 2010.
Art A., San Carlos, California

The Hypocrisy of Richard Silverstein, part 2, or "How Dare the Jews Write Back"

2009-07-09T10:23:00.000-07:00

Its getting to the point where I half expect to see Richard Silverstein’s photo in my Webster’s dictionary under "hypocrisy".

His latest missive: " Israel's foreign ministry organising to flood news websites with pro-Israeli comments " should be subtitled "How dare the Jews write back."

He states " You always hear about Israeli attempts at media manipulation. ", and yes, we do , Richard. We hear all about those Jews who control the media and Congress and Hollywood. We hear it all the time. And yes, Richard usually it’s the Zionists or Israelis as code words for "Jew". But we know what they mean. They’ve been saying it for years. Didn’t we hear about it in the Protocols first?

What we don’t hear about are the attempts from the other side. On his own blog, Richard issues a call to flood Israeli ministries with calls and email in support of FGM (isn’t that Female Genital Mutilation, Richard? Sure you want to use THAT acronym?) Yet when he does it, its not a shameless attempt to influence policy or distort public opinion. When Jewish Voice for Peace , frantic that the Free Gaza publicity stunt rendered so little publicity sent out a plea to thousands, begging them to write and call to " keep the media focused on this matter", Richard didn't condemn this. The plea contained an embedded hyperlink, with an automatic letter to the editor generator! And Richard says the Israelis are "orchestrating propaganda efforts designed to flood news websites" . Richard, don’t you think JVP’s automatic letter generator distorts "the balance and tone of the discussion with their programmed arguments" ? Somehow, I don’t expect you’ll be complaining about it on your blog any time soon.

In Richard Silverstein’s skewered world view Israel’s attempts to inform the public and news media of the reality on the ground is "favorable flackery" and is a vain attempt to tilt public opinion toward Israel. I'd call it speaking truth to power.

And speaking of "outright propaganda"- that does Israel a "disservice" , did you know, Richard, that in the "apartheid" state of Israel, a Muslim woman, Dr. Suheir Assady, was recently appointed as the new head of the Nephrology Department at Rambam Health Care Campus in Haifa? Dr. Assady is the the first Muslim woman to be directing a large medical department in an Israeli hospital. Yep. I bet thats just the just the kind of information that offends you, Richard, simply because its true.

Ship of fools: Free Gaza sails again.

2009-07-01T11:16:00.000-07:00

On Monday June 29 Free Gaza's latest ship of fools, "Spirit of Humanity" set sail from Cyprus with a false ships manifest, listing its destination as Egypt. That was just the first in a series of lies.

The next lie was sent via press release from spokesperson Greta Berlin: claiming the ship "carries three tons of medical aid, children's toys, and rehabilitation and reconstruction kits for twenty family homes.", in direct contrast with their twitter account which stated "We left this morning, one boat, 21 passengers, 20 olive trees, one symbolic bag of cement" .

The boat was intercepted by Israeli authorities and an immediate cacophony of emails and press releases were sent out calling for a phone and email blasts to Israeli and American officials. The squeals invariably had the theme " Free the 'kidnapped peace activists' who are just trying to give hope to the starving children of Gaza"

The reality is there is no humanitarian crisis in Gaza, and there are no starving children. Aid continues to flow through the crossings. This year alone over 366,282 tons of aid and over 45.693 million liters of fuel have been delivered to the Gaza Strip. Just last week, 674 truckloads (16,323 tons) of humanitarian aid were transferred to the Gaza Strip via the Kerem Shalom cargo terminal and the Karni conveyor belt. In addition to food, medicine and hygiene products, games, basketballs and balloons, trampolines and swimming pools, generators, air-conditioning accessories, clothing, shoes and hats, chairs, mattresses and Styrofoam cups; and raw materials for paper production were all transported into Gaza.

Basketballs and balloons. Swimming pools and trampolines. Oh those brutal and genocidal Israelis!!! Oh, those poor suffering Gazans!

If there is no humanitarian crisis why is Free Gaza working so hard to open the sea route to Gaza? Its certainly not cost effective to transport 20 trees this way. Could it be perhaps that its getting harder and harder to smuggle Iranian weapons via land? Its so much more efficient to go the sea route, if only those pesky Israelis would stop defending their borders. Could Free Gaza be trying to smooth the way for a new Karine A?

In 2002, Israel intercepted the Gaza bound Karine A at sea with 50 tons of Iranian and Russian-made weapons - long-range Katyusha rockets and mortar bombs, LAW anti-tank missiles, Sagger anti-tank missiles, mines, sniper rifles, ammunition and more than two tons of high explosives hidden in a cargo of rice, clothes and toys. Sound familiar?

The sad reality remain that until there is a true and lasting peace, checkpoints save lives on both sides of the conflict. And saving lives should be our priority. We all look forward to a day with out the threat of violence, of open borders and crossings. But until the day comes when Israel can live in peace, she needs to live with security. And Israel must control her own borders.

Atzmon in Berkeley Redux

2009-06-28T16:12:00.000-07:00

The ripples generated by the Berkeley visit of the anti-Semitic activist Gilad Atzmon continue to cause some mal de mer among those who never imagined that inviting someone who calls burning down a synagogue "a rational act" would create problems. There will be a conclave in several weeks at which various activists, both pro- and anti-Israel, as well as members of the BFUU, will get together to review the controversy. I'm actually not expecting anything to come of it, except perhaps getting the BFUU contingent to recognize that the various and sundry published statements that constitute Atzmon's trail of slime really are old-style "Protocols of the Elders of Zion" anti-Semitism. I'm not holding my breath.

Now of course, Atzmon himself could not resist posting about his experience in Berkeley (while calling the Jewish religion a "cult" and himself a "proud self-hater"-- if Atzmon can readily admit that he hates Jews, why can't others take him at his word?) . Of course, with typical grandiosity he posits that (as a result of previous criticism by a number of prominent Jewish anti-Zionists who found his hard-core anti-Semitism too extreme for even THEM to tolerate) "my views were rather accepted in wide circles". I guess if you only travel among syncophants, you must find that everyone agrees with you!

Here's the core of Atzmon's rant:

"I do want Zionist tribal activists to expose their symptoms. I want them to shout and to point their finger at every person whom they suspect to be an anti-Semite. By doing so, all they achieve in practice is admitting who they are. They are pointing their finger at themselves saying, “we are Zionists, we are a racist rightwingers, we are loud, proud and as you can see we are openly promoting our tribal interests.” "

Well, at least Atzmon can generate a half truth: we WERE proud to admit who we are-- we are Zionists, we believe that the Jewish people, like any other people who share a unique history and a tie to a specific land, are entitled to self-determination in that land. To grant that right to all other peoples and deny it only to the Jewish people is the true racism here. Most of us actually are moderate leftists (the kind who vote Democratic, support issues like LGBT rights, etc.). Many of us support Palestinian rights of self-determination-- just not as the Palestinians and their extremist supporters define it, making the elimination of Jewish self-determination an indispensible part of their demand. Funny how Atzmon doesn't see it as a problem for Palestinians to advocate for what they see as their "tribal interests". Double standards, anyone?

"I told my audience in Berkeley that the bunch of noisy people whom they met in the entrance were crucial for the understanding of Zionism and its violence. The people out there were exactly the same people as the Israelis, they were motivated by the same supremacist ideas. They were using exactly the same intimidating tactics. They just lacked the means to put us all behind barbed wire, to starve us or to spread white phosphorus over our heads. The picketers in Berkeley were waving the Israeli flag and carried placards, they were foreign to the calm evening scene as much as their settler brothers are foreign to the hills of Judea and Samaria. They basically brought Israeli ugliness to an innocent Californian street. Funnily enough from a light PA system they brought along they played some horrible Israeli folk music, they probably didn’t realise that I could recognise my saxophone and clarinet on most of these badly played and horribly arranged songs. "

Intimidating tactics-- standing with flags and signs and playing music. To paraphrase one participant in the rally, if that is intimidation then Dr. King's efforts to desegregate America were also intimidation. And Atzmon is completely and knowingly disingenuous when he refers to the Israelis living in the West Bank-- to Atzmon and to his supporters, there is no difference between Tel Aviv and Hebron, because they don't accept a Jewish state anywhere. And frankly, I couldn't care less whether Atzmon can play Israeli folk music on his instruments or not. Given what he stands for, the Horst Wessel song is probably more appropriate for him.

"A young Palestinian man who stood near to me asked the picketers, “why do you insist upon living on my land?” A blue flag waver turned to him, he had a massive star of David hanging on his chest. Here is what he said, “because, Israel is our promised land, we were waiting for 2000 years…. And don’t forget the holocaust”. As stupid as it may sound, this is basically what the Zionist argument is all about: the promise, the bible, the yearning and then of course the holocaust. Add to this Zionist lethal dish a lot of American weapons and Western backing and you have a ‘Jewish only state’ pushing for a global war. Israel got away with all of it for too many years. But after Gaza, the tide is changing. People out there see it all. The resentment towards Israel is growing by the day. This is something that I see in my concerts and talks around the world. I could see it again in Berkeley, in spite of all the pressure those Zionist operators mounted on the church for weeks, the event went ahead according to plan. The night was a great success."

Well, Atzmon is being disingenous again. Having once been Israeli, he knows all to well that the answer is that Israel was not founded because of the Holocaust; as a matter of fact, the Holocaust delayed the process of Jews returning to their land--by purchase, and by legal immigration-- that was well underway before the start of the Second World War. And if Israel is a Jewish only state, how does it have Arab members of the Supreme Court, the Knesset, and the Foreign Service? Of course, the claim that Israel is pushing for "global war" is absurdity on its face--the Jewish people certainly fared really well in the last global war, didn't we?

Yes, perhaps his night was a great success. Another 2 dozen people came to hear his hate speech. And an equal number protested him outside. He most likely encouraged ongoing jihad against Israel. We sang songs of peace.

I'm going to Israel tomorrow. I'm going to see a country that is far from perfect, that has tension between its religious and secular elements, between those who ancestry is European and those whose families left (or to be accurate, mostly fled) from homes in the Arab world, and between its Jewish citizens and its Arab citizens. But, for all its faults, it has done an incredible job of absorbing refugees from countries where they were never granted basic rights (such as the right not to be slaughtered on any pretext), of building a state that is both Jewish and democratic, and of maintaining civil rights for its Arab minority even while its elected representatives in the Knesset refuse to accept Israel as a Jewish state. And all of this while under ongoing attack from its neighbors for decades. Yet those who want to destroy Israel claim that they would replace it with a democratic state in which an Arab majority would supposedly respect the rights of a Jewish minority. (Of course, the Islamic world is replete with examples of how minorities are treated-- Christians in Gaza, Bahai in Iran, Copts in Egypt. And we are to believe that somehow the hatred implanted into Palestinians from the vile incitement against Jews-- not only from Hamas but also from the Palestinian Authority-- would magically be eliminated?)

Atzmon can fester in his hatred. I'm going to celebrate the fact that there is indeed a Jewish country in the Jewish homeland--and that it's not at all the way that Atzmon describes and defames it.

iPride and The Hypocrisy of Richard Silverstein

2009-06-20T14:10:00.000-07:00

As the weather heats up, it seems that the fevered minds of the anti-Israel crowd are getting similarly overheated. One of its more amusing members is Richard Silverstein , well known for his frequent use of ad hominem attacks against those who dare to disagree with him and whose site promotes Jimmy Carter's "Peace Not Apartheid" book as well as Walt and Mearshimer's "Israel Lobby".

This time Silverstein, in his arrogantly-named "Tikun Olam" blog, takes on the pro-Israel advocacy group StandWithUs in a rant breathtaking in both its hyperbole and its ignorance. First he compares iPride, SWU's promotion of a pro-Israel message to the LGBT community, to Chabad's attempts to bring secular Jews back to religious observance, as if there is something fundamentally wrong with either one of those. Is Silverstein so afraid of exposing people to traditional Jewish observance, or to the social milieu in Israel that isn't shown on mainstream news media? As far as the latter, he is definitely afraid that this will take LGBT opinion leaders and turn them into "gay pro-Israel Manchurian candidates". Silverstein then goes on to admonish one of iPride's leaders for claiming that "you can't really be gay in the Palestinian territories". Well, if LGBT Palestinians are "free to be", then why are they constantly fleeing to Israel? A cursory Google search of "gay Palestinians" turns up pages of LGBT-oriented websites documenting the oppression of gays whether in the West Bank or Gaza compared to the situation in Israel. I'm sorry Richard, did I miss coverage of the Gaza Pride Parade on al-Jazeera? Can you document ONE SINGLE LGBT rights organization within the West Bank and Gaza? Or even ONE SINGLE openly gay individual there? Oh right, I'm sure you'd blame that situation on "occupation" too.

Finally, Richard gets down to the core of his argument: "how can Jewish gays be truly free at the expense of 20% of the inhabitants who are even less free than they? Not to mention the 700,000 expelled in 1948? Can gays celebrate their alleged freedom to be themselves when millions of other Israelis and Palestinians are disenfranchised?" So, by his twisted logic, if there isn't full socioeconomic equality for Israeli Arabs (who of course have full and equal civil and political rights unequalled in the Arab world), then absolutely nothing good can be said about Israeli society. Did you check out the US anytime recently, Richard? Because we still don't have full equality for many minority groups, does that mean that we should write off any other measures of social progress? By the way, as soon as you return your home in the Seattle area to the descendants of the Suquamish and Duwamish people who lived there prior to the arrival of Americans, then you can start lecturing to others about their history. Until then, you remain just a hypocrite.

Of course, here in the Bay Area there are a few extremist LGBT groups that are anti-Israel. As one of my fellow activists points out, the "Queers for Palestine" group makes as much sense as a group called "Turkeys for Thanksgiving".

(I wonder if Silverstein knows that among the banner ads that appear on his blog is one for the HAS Advantage credit card-- the free VISA card that not only benefits Israeli charities, including advocacy groups such as HonestReporting, but also lets you build travel credits to Israel faster than most other cards! That is how I got 2 reward trips for my travel next week on El Al.)

Staring Evil in the Face--Gilad Atzmon at the BFUU

2009-06-13T11:30:00.000-07:00

A number of readers are of course quite curious as to what finally happened when professional anti-Semite Gilad Atzmon came to Berkeley to perform a concert at the Berkeley Fellowship of Unitarian Universalists.

Members of the BFUU had expressed a great deal of consternation in the days leading up to the event itself. They alternated between trying to distance themselves from the event on the one hand, while on the other hand denying that Atzmon was a hateful creature who should not be invited by any group of civilized citizens. Certainly they did not welcome the publicity and they did not welcome the several dozen activists who held a public vigil outside the church that evening.

A BFUU member handed me a "statement for public inquiry". It makes for interesting reading.

"The BFUU-SJC [note: Social Justice Committee of the BFUU] agreed to be a cosponsor but was unaware at the time of Mr Atzmon's controversial reputation in some quarters." This I can easily believe. I can only hope that in the future BFUU will do some basic research before agreeing to bring in other hatemongers that groups such as ISM and Bay Area Women in Black might wish to promote. I can suggest a few easy ways to do that-- Google, Yahoo Search, and Ixquick are all very user-friendly!

"At this point in time we are prepared to publicly state that we have read some quotes by Mr Atzmon that have earned him severe condemnation and that we find these quotes to be extreme." Extreme. OK, that's a start, although you can almost see the clenched teeth through which even this minimally negative statement is forced. Not entirely certain if that's a disclaimer or not; after all, "extreme" isn't always a negative connotation. There's an entire group of entertainment events called "Extreme Sports" and even a local pizza chain called Extreme Pizza. Maybe the members of the SJC took Atzmon there after his appearance.

Then they get to the gist of it: "At the same time we have also begun studying some of Mr Atzmon's writings and have listened to analysts expert in the field who say that even though he has made very controversial statements he does not deserve to be shut out of public debate." This is the argument which hate speakers and Holocaust deniers from David Duke to David Irving to Mahmoud Ahmedinejad fall back on. Does the BFUU also feel that David Duke should be a part of public debate on race relations in this country?

So in the end, the BFUU SJC refused, in its meeting the day prior to the event, to even take the tepid step of quietly withdrawing its sponsorship of this event, and the BFUU decided to defend Atzmon despite his "controversial statements".

The protest itself was interesting in the reaction that it engendered from those at the BFUU event (apparently about an equal number to the demonstrators themselves). Many of those in attendance took numerous photographs of the demonstrators in a silly attempt at intimidation. One notorious local hater appeared with his Hamas flag, while another who has written approvingly of the man who recently murdered 4 Oakland police officers and has also publicly written anti-Semitic hate screeds even worse than Atzmon's came out to share in the bonhomie. It's not surprising that Atzmon would draw these types of troglodytes.

The aftermath of this event is yet to be written. The BFUU, of course, has hurt feelings that anyone would consider inviting a hate speaker to be in opposition to their own "covenant to affirm and promote the inherent worth and dignity of every person." There is an attempt being made by some genuinely well-meaning individuals to initiate a dialogue between those who made this event possible and those of us who protested against it. I'm somewhat skeptical of the chances for that effort to succeed; after all, those who openly support the genocidal aims of Hamas don't see anything wrong with bringing that agenda directly into our community. As I said to one BFUU member holding a sign that claimed that BFUU stood for the dignity of every person: Which part of "burning down a synagogue... would be a rational act" supports that lofty position?

Fight the BDS Movement--Shop at Trader Joe's on June 20!

2009-06-09T16:28:00.000-07:00

The BDS (Boycott, Divestment, Sanctions) movement is an tactic from the anti-apartheid effort now adopted by the anti-Israel groups in the US and Europe. Of course, it completely ignores the actual fact, which is that Arabs in the State of Israel have citizenship and full and equal political and civil rights.

Periodically, this effort targets stores selling Israeli products, in an effort to persuade them to stop stocking them. This time, they have focused their efforts on Trader Joe's. The good news is that Trader Joe's isn't buying the garbage being peddled by the anti-Israel groups, but will continue to buy (and sell) the Israeli products that they have provided for years. (Disclaimer: I just love shopping at Trader Joe's. It's the only store I know of around here where I can--and do-- buy Osem couscous, Eden feta, or the Dorot frozen cubes of garlic, basil and cilantro.)

This letter was received by the Central Pacific office of the Anti-Defamation League from Jon Basalone,Senior VP, Marketing, Trader Joe's:
“We have received a few letters like this via our customer relations email as well. Our response is that we sell products, and do not use our products as political tools or to make any statements about any political causes. We have no intention of removing any products based on pressure from any group, no matter what they support or don’t support. As always, we believe our customers are smart, and they are capable of making decisions about what they purchase. Let me know if you have any more questions or need more information.”

So the good news is that nobody has to contact Trader Joe's to urge them to keep Israeli products in the stores. However, the anti-Israel groups behind the BDS effort have called for concerted action on June 20 (World Refugee Day) to "de-shelve" Israeli products from Trader Joe's. Somehow, the Arab regimes that have kept their Arab brethren locked in refugee camps for 60 years avoid any responsibility for this--I don't see Lebanese, Egyptian or Jordanian products being targeted.

Now, I only know of 3 ways to "de-shelve" a product-- you get the store to pull it off the shelf, you buy it, or you steal/vandalize it. Given that the first has already proven a failure, and I don't think they plan to BUY a whole bunch of couscous, that leaves stealing and vandalizing.

So, go to your local Trader Joe's and do three things on June 20 (or, if you are shomer Shabbat, on June 19):

1. Buy a whole bunch of Israeli products (if they are off the shelf, maybe someone else read this and bought the entire stock-- so go to the store manager and tell him/her they need to buy more!)

2. Tell the store manager to keep stocking these products because you really like them!

3. Also tell the store manager that anti-Israel groups have declared June 20 as a "National Day to De-Shelve Israeli Products" so they can be aware of potential efforts to shoplift, deface or otherwise vandalize these products.

And please pass the couscous.

Gilad Atzmon, the Berkeley Fellowship of Unitarian Universalists, and Hate Speech

2009-06-02T19:12:00.000-07:00

In our previous post, we noted that the anti-Israel Bay Area Women in Black are co-sponsoring a fundraising concert by the openly anti-Semitic Gilad Atzmon. Now we knew that there was no chance that BAWIB, or their partners in this event, the International Solidarity Movement, didn't know about Atzmon's record. But perhaps the church that is co-sponsoring the event, the Berkeley Fellowship of Unitarian Universalists, would respond to being informed about Atzmon's record and do the right thing by cancelling the concert. After all, churches of the liberal Protestant variety are not going to want someone whose vicious trail of anti-Semitic slime is easily visible to even a casual Internet search, right? Wrong.

The BFUU may not have been aware of Atzmon's own statements, or his support of the fascist Israel Shamir or the Holocaust denier Paul Eisen, when they agreed to host and co-sponsor this event. (The church will claim that because it was just their Social Justice Committee that this doesn't imply sponsorship by the church itself. That's a difference without a distinction.) But as of last week, they were made aware of it. But somehow, the straightforward statements by Atzmon still leaves at least one prominent member of the church "unconvinced by this evidence".

I'm not sure what is unconvincing about the following statements that iterate classic anti-Semitic tropes:

"Throughout the centuries, Jewish bankers bought for themselves some real reputations of backers and financers of wars [2] and even one communist revolution [3]. Though rich Jews had been happily financing wars using their assets, Alan Greenspan, the Chairman of the Federal Reserve of the United States, found a far more sophisticated way to finance the wars perpetrated by his ideological brothers Libby and Wolfowitz."

Source: http://palestinethinktank dot com/2008/09/30/gilad-atzmon-credit-crunch-or-rather-zio-punch/ (note: to avoid linking to some of these sites, I have replaced "."with "dot")

Another Jews-run-the-government line, this one from his own website www dot gilad.co.uk/html%20files/onanti.html :

" The 'Elders of Zion' syndrome: Zionists complain that Jews continue to be associated with a conspiracy to rule the world via political lobbies, media and money. Is the suggestion of conspiracy really an empty accusation?
The following list is presented with pride in several Jewish American websites.
Jews in Bush's Administration (a list of some 30 names follows…)
Let me assure you, in Clinton's administration the situation was even worse. Even though the Jews only make up 1.9 per cent of the country's population, an astounding 56 per cent of Clinton's appointees were Jews. A coincidence? I don't think so."

The same article trots out the old "Christ-killer" charge:

"I would suggest that perhaps we should face it once and for all: the Jews were responsible for the killing of Jesus who, by the way, was himself a Palestinian Jew. …..Why is it that the Jews who repeatedly demand that the Christian world should apologise for its involvement in previous persecutions, have never thought that it is about time that they apologised for killing Jesus?"

.
The careful reader will note that the words "Israel" or "Zionism" do not appear in the above quotes. Yes, they appear elsewhere in those screeds. But the record is clear. He is spreading anti-Semitic hate.

There's so much more. There's a treasure trove of Atzmonia collected over at Harry's Place --just type in "Atzmon" in the search box

In 2005, the Guardian reported one of his statements that is clearly incitement.

"Gilad Atzmon, a pro-Palestine advocate, gave a talk to students this month, arguing: 'I'm not going to say whether it is right or not to burn down a synagogue, I can see that it is a rational act.'"

There's nothing ambiguous, nothing that can be misinterpreted about THAT.

Concerned readers can contact the BFUU. However, calls or contacts should be constructed politely; after all, the people in the office who answer calls may have had nothing to do with this! And e-mails shouldn't resort to calling BFUU members anti-Semites, or use hate speech similar to that which Atzmon uses. Your goal is to help them realize how far off the mark they are in this matter. Just ask them what they would do if someone was using similar hate speech against African-Americans, or LGBT individuals, or Moslems-- would they permit such an event to go ahead? Then why is it OK if it's just against Jews?

Berkeley Fellowship of Unitarian Unversalists
1606 Bonita Avenue
Berkeley CA 94709
office@bfuu.org
510-841-4824

Bay Area Women in Black-- They Hate Zionism, but Holocaust Deniers are OK

2009-05-23T16:51:00.000-07:00

Bay Area Women in Black is known in the San Francisco area for its frequent anti-Israel protests, either on their own or in support of the racist International ANSWER. Despite its self-styled image as a peace group, they have consistently refused to take a position against Palestinian terrorism while they sponsor speakers who call for the destruction of Israel. Now they have sunk to depths previously unplumbed, in their open association with the Holocaust denier community.

BAWIB is, along with the terrorist support network International Solidarity Movement, sponsoring fundraising concerts in Berkeley and Palo Alto by saxophonist Gilad Atzmon. Atzmon is a former Israeli Jew who has renounced his membership in the Jewish people and now supports the far right where it meets up with the extreme left-- at the intersection of paranoid schizophrenia and Jew-hatred known as Holocaust denial.

It's not enough that Atzmon has come up with his own gems such as “American Jews do try to control the world, by proxy” ; “There is no such thing as anti-Semitism”; and
“Why is it that the Jews who repeatedly demand that the Christian world should apologize for its involvement in previous persecutions, have never thought that it is about time that they apologized for killing Jesus?” He also is a strong supporter of the Swedish fascist who goes by the pen name of Israel Shamir. Shamir has written that “we need the voices of David Duke…and Pat Buchanan”, and has claimed that Jews have indeed slaughtered Christian children for their blood (the infamous “blood libel” now being vigorously promoted in some Arab countries), and claimed that “Auschwitz was an internment facility, attended by the Red Cross”. Shamir is so toxic that even extremist Israel-haters such as Ali Abuminah, Sue Blackwell and Jeff Halper dissociate themselves from him in their embarrassment at sharing the same agenda. But Atzmon consistently defends Shamir and calls him "a unique and advanced thinker".

Atzmon is also a fan of one Paul Eisen, a far right ideologue in the UK who wrote an article promoting the Holocaust denial revisionism of Ernst Zundel. Atzmon circulated and promoted the article. Atzmon defended his decision on his own website as follows (T is Tony Greenstein, a Marxist anti-Zionist from the UK-- Atzmon is also too far off the grid for him):

"T: By your own admission you are distributing Eisen’s holocaust denial text.
G: Holocaust Denial is in itself a Zionist terminology and I refuse to accept it or to use it.
T: I understand that you have been distributing Paul Eisen's most recent The Holocaust Wars which denies, in the course of defending Ernest Zundel, that there ever was a holocaust or extermination of European Jewry by the Nazis.
G: Mr Greenstein, True, I circulated Paul Eisen's paper. I do believe that argumentative texts must be circulated as widely as possible."

It's bad enough that BAWIB endorses and participates in ANSWER's rallies, which feature overt anti-Semitism. Regarding BAWIB using Atzmon to raise funds for its own efforts to rewrite history, the only phrase that comes to mind is the one which with attorney Joseph Welch challenged the demagoguery and bullying on Senator Joseph McCarthy in 1954: "Have you no sense of decency? At long last, have you left no sense of decency?"

Obama, Netanyahu and Linkage

2009-05-20T15:49:00.000-07:00

(BlueTruth is once again happy to present a column by our friend Lawrence White)

Obama, Netanyahu, and Linkage

By Lawrence W. White

Volumes have been written about the Arab-Israeli conflict. Books, essays, think tanks; commentators on television and radio;, newspaper articles, columns and letters to the editor; community meetings, task forces public and private; State Department and other government branches; governments all over the world, as well as the United Nations; every US President since Harry Truman. All have weighed in. with their analyses and solutions, their certainty that “if only” such and such were done, this intractable 60 year problem would be solved.

David Harris has dubbed this the “IOI syndrome”. “If only Israel ….” Thus “if only Israel” froze the settlements, removed the separation wall, stopped the “humiliating” checkpoints, recognized the government in Gaza that says it will never accept Israel, and ignored the verbal threats of annihilation from Iran, Hamas and Hezbollah as propaganda for domestic consumption. “If only Israel” had not elected a hard line new government that is unwisely keeping Israel from taking actions that will guarantee peace for all eternity.

And yet the real cause of this long conflict, for anyone who has studied it closely, can be stated in two words “Arab rejectionism”. Until this problem is resolved, there can be no peace. Israel has taken risks for peace repeatedly; while the Palestinians have not accepted the presence of Israel in the neighborhood. Contrary to the media interpretations, it is the Palestinians who do not accept a two-state solution. Hamas in Gaza has repeatedly stated it will never accept the “Zionist entity”. Fatah in the West Bank, for its part, states it cannot accept the presence of a Jewish state.

For this reason, President Obama and Secretary Clinton are certain to fail in their quest for a peace agreement. They have fallen into the trap of conventional wisdom, progressive nonsense, and New York Times editorializing, namely that Israel must make concessions for a solution to be forthcoming. History has proven this wrong. All the prior steps that Israel has taken, including the offer made by Barak and Clinton at Camp David, the Oslo agreements, unilateral withdrawals from Lebanon and Gaza, and countless others, have been followed by failure and accelerated bloodshed.

For the US, the ability to change the minds of the Arab street or their rulers is minimal to absent. Therefore, for those who believe they must make a deal, the only way to have a meeting of the minds is to lean on Israel to make “concessions”. According to the US view, nothing can be done about Arab rejectionism, so it needs to be largely accepted and ignored. Oh, words and promises will be made, as they have countless times before, only to be ignored by the Arab states, by the Palestinians, and most importantly by world powers including the US.

For their part, the Palestinians are wise to this game, and know they will not be required to really accept the presence of a Jewish state, so they go through the motions. (Prime Minister Abbas has already stated that he will never accept a Jewish state). Israel, for its part, knowing the process will certainly fail, also goes through the motions, but for different reasons; it must not offend the US.

And now, again, the President of the US and the Prime Minister of Israel met on May 18. . Now, there is a new dimension; the problem of Iran, and the phenomenon of linkage, with each side having a different idea of what this means (the difference being one of 180 degrees).
For Israel, linkage means solve the Iran problem first, then turn attention to an Israeli-Arab peace. The prospect of a nuclear Iran is an existential and immediate threat for Israel. It also contains within it dangers for the entire Middle East, for the US, and for Europe. And contrary to the belief by some that Iran is “pragmatic” Alan Dershowitz has pointed out that Hashemi Rifsanjani told an American journalist “[that an Iranian [nuclear] attack would kill as many as five million Jews. Rafsanjani estimated that even if Israel retaliated by dropping its own nuclear bombs, Iran would probably lose only fifteen million people, which he said would be a small 'sacrifice' from among the billion Muslims in the world.” In other words, they really mean it and need to be believed. And then there is also the strong probability that nuclear material would end up in the hands of Hezbollah, or Hamas, whose track record indicates that they would have no hesitation in using it.
For the US, linkage is the opposite. According to the Jerusalem Post, White House Chief of Staff Rahm Emanuel told AIPAC recently that "the task of stopping Iran would be made easier if progress were made in peace negotiations between Israel and the Palestinians.” In other words, Emanuel linked the two matters in a way opposite to that of Israel, saying that the efforts to stop Iran depended on peace talks with the Palestinians. Other administration figures have made similar statements, along with much of the media.
Alan Dershowitz points out that
“Israel has the right, indeed the obligation, to take this threat seriously and to consider it as a first priority. It will be far easier for Israel to make peace with the Palestinians if it did not have to worry about the threat of a nuclear attack or a dirty bomb. It will also be easier for Israel to end its occupation of the West Bank if Iran were not arming and inciting Hamas, Hezbollah and other enemies of Israel to terrorize Israel with rockets and suicide bombers. In this respect, Emanuel has it exactly backwards: if there is any linkage, it goes the other way - defanging Iran will promote the end of the occupation and the two-state solution. Threatening not to help Israel in relation to Iran unless it moves toward a two-state solution first is likely to backfire.”
This is not the first time in history that a national leader has threatened Jews with destruction, and proved that they meant it. (When someone threatens to murder you, it is prudent to believe them.) The threat from Iran is immediate, and must be dealt with immediately. The problem of Arab rejectionism, on the other hand, will take much longer to resolve. Prime Minister Netanyahu is on the right track when he indicates that the problem needs to be approached along economic lines; most productive individuals do not want to murder their customers.

Not surprisingly, the meeting between Obama and Netanyahu was not conflictual, despite pressure from left wing activist Democrats, from European leaders, and from many of Obama’s own aides. Neither party wishes to fight with the other. President Obama simply has too many other critical problems at present, both domestic and foreign.. Further, Congress remains highly supportive of Israel, and Obama does not want to alienate his Jewish supporters, 80% of whom voted for him. On the other side, Israel wants and needs a strong US-Israel relationship, and Netanyahu is determined not to alienate the US President.

Israel will accept a two-state solution if they believe that it will truly be a solution, that it will truly result in peace. And make no mistake, Israeli leaders and Israeli citizens have historically been willing to take major risks for peace; that has not changed. But first, for peace to be achieved, the immediate existential threat emanating from Iran, and the long-standing presence of Arab rejectionism, must be eliminated.

For Marla Bennett

2009-05-08T19:16:00.000-07:00

Oh, those silly, silly Bay area anti-Zionists. Their "NOTICE ME!, NOTICE ME" temper tantrums are getting more and more elaborate. At first, they were content to simply interrupt free speech, to muzzle any dissenting voices, because after all, only their side deserves to be heard. But that wasn't enough to get noticed. So they decided to vandalize kosher food products in Bay area grocery stores. But in spite of their congratulatory self promotion in the local independent media, still no one seemed to care. Their latest misadventure involves inserting mock ads into local bus shelters. This one, in a UC Berkeley bus shelter lasted mere hours before it was removed.

Why did the shelter "ad" stand out so clearly as fraud and theft of service? Well, there is the small matter of everything on it being false.

In particular, the "ad " asks that the University of California's partnership with the study abroad program at Hebrew University, one of the top universities in the world be rescinded.

The First Board of Governors of this prestigious school included Albert Einstein, Sigmund Freud, Martin Buber, and Chaim Weizmann. Albert Einstein bequeathed his papers to the university, which has hosted many Nobel Laureates.

Why would the vandals want to prevent UC students from having the opportunity to study at this prestigious school? Could they fear for the students safety? After all, the university was attacked on July 31, 2002, when a Palestinian exploded a bomb in the university's crowded cafeteria during lunch time. Nine people, including UC Berkeley's own Marla Bennett, were killed in the attack. Hamas claimed responsibility. No- ensuring student safety is not their motivation.

Thought bubbles on the poster say "I believe that governments must be held accountable for their action", ignoring the fact that Israel's academic communities function independent of the government.

The vandals also ignore the fact that more dialog- academic, cultural and personal - is the key to peaceful co-existence. Their motivation for this, and all their actions is the immoral and hypocritical demonization of the only nation in the region that shares our values of liberal democracy, with freedom and civil rights for all its citizens.

Marla Bennett before her murder at age 24, wrote "There is nowhere else in the world I would rather be right now. I have a front-row seat for the history of the Jewish people. I am a part of the struggle for Israel's survival." It is that spirit the anti-zionists seek to smother with their vandalism, and with their proposed boycott

Jewish Voice for Peace Says: Standing Up for Darfur is "Hateful"

2009-04-26T15:56:00.000-07:00

Just when you thought the people at the tragicomically misnamed "Jewish Voice for Peace" couldn't stoop any lower into the gutter, they have decided to embarrass themselves with a rant breathtaking in its ignorance. Cecilie Surasky, posting on their house organ Muzzlewatch , decided that a group of Jewish students and Darfurian refugees demonstrating in Geneva against the farcical UN human rights conference were actually "being used as part of a hateful effort" by "scary right wing group StandWithUs". She goes on to deplore that there was tension between African and Arab delegates over Darfur (not that there would be any good reason to have tension over the wholesale slaughter of Africans by an Islamic regime). She must have been paying close attention to all those conspiracy websites that blame the evil Zionists for the conspiracy to save Darfur.

Cecilie did, in a different post, lament that Ahmedinijad's tirade against Israel undermined the work of the conference; but of course couldn't resist blaming the nefarious Israel Lobby for that ("He handed over to the pro-Israeli-occupation groups all they needed to make their point, that Durban II is just an Israel-hate fest."). But she doesn't appear to have a problem with a "human rights" conference run by the likes of Libya and Cuba, or the fact that the Arab states would block any consideration of the genocide in Darfur. And of course, in JVP-world, ANY group that supports the Jewish people's right to self-determination is a scary-right wing group-- in the same way that if you are standing at the North Pole, every direction that you look is south. I would also have thought that Cecilie would have no problem with the symbolism of the tape over one's mouth used by the demonstrators in Geneva to highlight the UN conference's silence over Darfur and other human rights issues in the Arab world-- after all, Muzzlewatch uses a similar image on its website. Of course, in JVP's case, it's just not quite the truth, since their anti-Israel perspective receives a steady roar of publicity thanks to Jimmy Carter, Walt and Mearsheimer, and other self-styled proponents of "peace". But then again, truth has never really been JVP's strong point.

So, in summary, a group of people shows the hypocrisy of the Geneva conference by holding hearings and public demonstrations on grave human rights violations--violations ignored by the UN conference under pressure from Islamic regimes. Yet JVP, which has shown no hesitation about standing with the racists of International ANSWER , calls this a "hateful effort"? Tell me, Cecilie, what signs did they hold that showed hatred? Where were their signs calling for extermination of an entire people, or glorifying tyrants like Hitler (contrast this to the NGO forum in Durban in 2001 which featured overt celebrations of Hitler and the Shoah)? Or do you define as "hatred" anything that affronts the delicate sensibilities of your Islamist friends?

No, addressing human rights is not a joke. Attempting to use a human rights conference to further a political vendetta against Israel is what turned the Geneva and Durban conferences into a sick joke; Ahmedinejad's presence turned it into a full-fledged circus. The clown nose fits him, as well as all those who see the world through the fun-house mirror of hatred of Israel that distorts reality. We've got one that fits you too, Cecilie.

Juliano Mer Khamis-- Is the Freedom Theater Training Children for Jihad?

2009-04-22T21:47:00.000-07:00

Last summer I attended a screening of the movie "Arna's Children" which was sponsored by a local "peace" group called 14 Friends of Palestine. Like many groups which say that they are all for peace, all of their events are not only in opposition to Israeli policy but feature speakers who don't accept the Jewish people's right to self-determination in our own homeland.

The movie has been featured in both Arab and Jewish film festivals, and I was curious; plus the filmmaker, Juliano Mer Khamis, was going to be there to discuss the film as well as the children's theatre group in the Jenin refugee camp that was founded by his late mother (the Arna of the title). The film, though certainly flawed, is a powerful piece, given that a large portion of it was filmed in Jenin during Operation Defensive Shield in 2002 during which the so-called Jenin Massacre took place and follows several former members of the children's theater troupe who had become members of Fatah's al-Aqsa Martyrs Brigade (one ends up as a mass murderer when he randomly guns down civilians in Hadera, another gets killed while attacking IDF soldiers).

In the discussion afterwards, I asked Juliano, whose father is Arab, whether his mother (who had fought in the Haganah) and he (who had served in the IDF) were promoting simply an anti-occupation viewpoint, or a frankly anti-Israel viewpoint; given that his mother was shown giving a speech to the children praising "intifada", it seemed a reasonable question. Juliano, however, thought this was an entirely unreasonable question, asking how I could even dare to suggest that. He implied, if not straightforwardly stated, that this wasn't about anything except the occupation.

Well, Juliano is an actor by training, and he acted the part of the righteously indignant with skill and gusto. The problem, as it turns out, is that he is indeed an actor, and a bald-faced liar to boot. As part of the controversy that developed when a children's orchestra from Jenin played for an audience of Holocaust survivors, the Freedom Theatre has also come under verbal and physical attack by violent Islamist extremists. So in an attempt to shield himself and his theatre project from this, he has recruited former al-Aqsa Brigades terrorist commander (subsequently granted amnesty by Israel) Zakariya Zubeidi to support the theater. And in a press conference in Jenin this week, Juliano played a very different tune:

""I do not rule out armed struggle," he said, bounding with confidence and strikingly charismatic. "An armed struggle is legitimate as long as it is directed at an occupier, and conducted on occupied land. An occupied people can act against its occupier in any means necessary," Mer said, adding that, "None of us here is to prevent someone from carrying a gun." "But if there's no history, culture, or art behind that gun than that gun is killing instead of liberating." Mer continued, promising that the theater "will not accept funding from any Israeli side," adding that decision on the matter was "final." "I want to make it clear: I support one Palestinian state, from the sea to the [Jordan] river. If the Jews want to live among us, Ahalan wa Sahalan [Arabic for 'go ahead']." http://www.haaretz.com/hasen/spages/1079929.html

Well, Juliano, you are a good actor. You almost had me believing that you were trying to take a brave step for peace and coexistence and away from violence. But since you apparently believe that all Israel is "occupied land", then "any means necessary" would include such atrocities as the Park Hotel Seder massacre that led to Operation Defensive Shield and the deaths of some of your young terrorist friends. Is it the fact that you now fear a Palestinian bullet that is getting you to openly support terrorism? Or is it actually your goal to have another generation of children come through the theatre and end up as jihadists?

Hate Speech is not Free speech. UCSB has become the latest front in the war against campus anti-Semitism.

2009-04-22T12:45:00.001-07:00

Several months ago, Professor William I. Robinson, a self described “scholar -activist” and professor of Sociology and Global Studies at the University of California, Santa Barbara forwarded an email to his students condemning Israel. The email contained images of Nazi atrocities along with images from Israel’s defensive campaign against Hamas’s terror. This comparison is considered by both the US State Dept and the European Union, in their working paper on Anti-Semitism to cross the line into anti-Semitism, and was so disturbing to at least two students that they felt compelled to drop his class. Because of the nature of the emails, the Anti-Defamation League, as well as the UCSB Academic Senate’s Charges Committee have become involved.

The summary of allegations against Robinson include:

* As professor of an academic course, he sent each student enrolled in his course a highly partisan email accompanied by lurid photographs.
* The email was unexpected and without educational context and was unrelated to the course
* No avenue to discuss or respond to the opinions and photographs was included in the email.
* As a result, two enrolled students felt too uncomfortable to continue with the course.

Robinson’s behavior is considered to be in violation of the UC Santa Barbara Faculty Code of Conduct.

In an effort to mobilize support for Robinson and his agenda, the ironically named Committee to Defend Academic Freedom at UC Santa Barbara has spammed an appeal for “solidarity”across the state in Marxist chatrooms and anti-Israel sites. Caesar "El Che" Rodriguez, claims that the basis of the complaints against Robinson are that 1) critique of Israel is evidence of anti-Semitism and 2) the Israeli-Palestinian issue should not be discussed in a class on Globalization.
Of course- that isn’t what the ADL letter to Robinson said at all.

“While your writings are protected by the First amendment and academic freedom, we rely on our own rights to say that your comparisons of Nazis and Israelis are offensive... and have crossed the line well beyond legitimate criticism of Israel.... the tone and the extreme views presented in your email were intimidating to students and likely chilled thoughtful discussion on the Israeli-Palestinian issue”

Caesar, William- do you need help distinguishing between legitimate criticism of Israel and Anti-Semitism?
We want to help. Try Natan Sharansky’s test, the 3' D’s
The first D is the test of demonization. Is the world’s only Jewish state being demonized by having its actions blown out of proportion?
The second D is the test of double standards. Is criticism of Israel being applied selectively?
The third D is the test of deligitimization. We know that all nations have flaws- but does Israel alone have fatal flaws that invalidate its existence and justify its destruction?

Seven Muslim Children

2009-04-06T18:55:00.000-07:00

The British playwright Caryl Churchill has written a short play called "Seven Jewish Children". It purports to relate the story about seven Jewish children in seven different time periods, from the Holocaust through the present, through voices of adults who debate what to tell the children about what is happening. No children appear in the play. It is very critical of Zionism, and, not surprisingly for a 10 minute play, treats issues with extreme superficiality. It has been staged both in London and in the US; Churchill has now made the text available for free to encourage local performances.

Jeffrey Goldberg, writing in the Atlantic Monthly termed it "a drive-by shooting of a play" and a "blood libel" . Goldberg also contrasted the response to this play to a hypothetical similar effort aimed at Muslims: "One of the reasons the Muslim world is in trouble is that self-criticism is so stifled. But there comes a point when its like, "enough already." But answer this question. If David Mamet were to write "Seven Muslim Children: An Inquiry Into Why Palestinians Allow Their Sons to Become Suicide Bombers," do you think that people would be sitting in Beirut and Amman, staging the play and having dialogue groups about whether the play was fair or not?"

So, inspired by Mr. Goldberg, I have written "Seven Muslim Children". (I can hear Goldberg now: "I know David Mamet; David Mamet is a friend of mine; and you, sir are no David Mamet." Trust me, I already know that.)

Many of you will read this and think that it is a superficial, Islamophobic, hateful piece. It is. Just as "Seven Jewish Children" is a superficial, anti-Semitic, hateful piece. Those of you who felt that "Seven Jewish Children" is a literary atrocity should feel the same way about this. Please note that I am not (repeat: NOT) endorsing the sentiments reflected here. It is a literary device, a satire, a through-the-looking-glass version of Churchill's "play". But for those who feel that "yes, let's have discussion groups, let's put on this play in the interest of art and free speech": do you think the anti-Muslim version is a legitimate point of view? do you think it is appropriate to present THAT viewpoint in your theater? do you think it should be given equal time? and if not, why not? (discuss amongst yourselves...)

For those who have not yet read it, I have included the original text of "Seven Jewish Children" first. I have also added notes on some of the references made within "Seven Muslim Children".

The time frames in Churchill's play are fairly obvious. For benefit of the reader, I will label my chapters with the time frames, since they are not the same as Churchill's.

Seven Jewish Children by Caryl Churchill, courtesy of Elder of Ziyon
1
Tell her it’s a game
Tell her it’s serious
But don’t frighten her
Don’t tell her they’ll kill her
Tell her it’s important to be quiet
Tell her she’ll have cake if she’s good
Tell her to curl up as if she’s in bed
But not to sing.
Tell her not to come out
Tell her not to come out even if she hears shouting
Don’t frighten her
Tell her not to come out even if she hears nothing for a long time
Tell her we’ll come and find her
Tell her we’ll be here all the time.
Tell her something about the men
Tell her they’re bad in the game
Tell her it’s a story
Tell her they’ll go away
Tell her she can make them go away if she keeps still
By magic
But not to sing.

2
Tell her this is a photograph of her grandmother, her uncles and me
Tell her her uncles died
Don’t tell her they were killed
Tell her they were killed
Don’t frighten her.
Tell her her grandmother was clever
Don’t tell her what they did
Tell her she was brave
Tell her she taught me how to make cakes
Don’t tell her what they did
Tell her something
Tell her more when she’s older.
Tell her there were people who hated Jews
Don’t tell her
Tell her it’s over now
Tell her there are still people who hate Jews
Tell her there are people who love Jews
Don’t tell her to think Jews or not Jews
Tell her more when she’s older
Tell her how many when she’s older
Tell her it was before she was born and she’s not in danger
Don’t tell her there’s any question of danger.
Tell her we love her
Tell her dead or alive her family all love her
Tell her her grandmother would be proud of her.

3
Don’t tell her we’re going for ever
Tell her she can write to her friends, tell her her friends can maybe come and visit
Tell her it’s sunny there
Tell her we’re going home
Tell her it’s the land God gave us
Don’t tell her religion
Tell her her great great great great lots of greats grandad lived there
Don’t tell her he was driven out
Tell her, of course tell her, tell her everyone was driven out and the country is waiting for us to come home
Don’t tell her she doesn’t belong here
Tell her of course she likes it here but she’ll like it there even more.
Tell her it’s an adventure
Tell her no one will tease her
Tell her she’ll have new friends
Tell her she can take her toys
Don’t tell her she can take all her toys
Tell her she’s a special girl
Tell her about Jerusalem.

4
Don’t tell her who they are
Tell her something
Tell her they’re Bedouin, they travel about
Tell her about camels in the desert and dates
Tell her they live in tents
Tell her this wasn’t their home
Don’t tell her home, not home, tell her they’re going away
Don’t tell her they don’t like her
Tell her to be careful.
Don’t tell her who used to live in this house
No but don’t tell her her great great grandfather used to live in this house
No but don’t tell her Arabs used to sleep in her bedroom.
Tell her not to be rude to them
Tell her not to be frightened
Don’t tell her she can’t play with the children
Don’t tell her she can have them in the house.
Tell her they have plenty of friends and family
Tell her for miles and miles all round they have lands of their own
Tell her again this is our promised land.
Don’t tell her they said it was a land without people
Don’t tell her I wouldn’t have come if I’d known.
Tell her maybe we can share.
Don’t tell her that.

5

Tell her we won
Tell her her brother’s a hero
Tell her how big their armies are
Tell her we turned them back
Tell her we’re fighters
Tell her we’ve got new land.

6

Don’t tell her
Don’t tell her the trouble about the swimming pool
Tell her it’s our water, we have the right
Tell her it’s not the water for their fields
Don’t tell her anything about water.
Don’t tell her about the bulldozer
Don’t tell her not to look at the bulldozer
Don’t tell her it was knocking the house down
Tell her it’s a building site
Don’t tell her anything about bulldozers.
Don’t tell her about the queues at the checkpoint
Tell her we’ll be there in no time
Don’t tell her anything she doesn’t ask
Don’t tell her the boy was shot
Don’t tell her anything.
Tell her we’re making new farms in the desert
Don’t tell her about the olive trees
Tell her we’re building new towns in the wilderness.
Don’t tell her they throw stones
Tell her they’re not much good against tanks
Don’t tell her that.
Don’t tell her they set off bombs in cafés
Tell her, tell her they set off bombs in cafés
Tell her to be careful
Don’t frighten her.
Tell her we need the wall to keep us safe
Tell her they want to drive us into the sea
Tell her they don’t
Tell her they want to drive us into the sea.
Tell her we kill far more of them
Don’t tell her that
Tell her that
Tell her we’re stronger
Tell her we’re entitled
Tell her they don’t understand anything except violence
Tell her we want peace
Tell her we’re going swimming.

7
Tell her she can’t watch the news
Tell her she can watch cartoons
Tell her she can stay up late and watch Friends.
Tell her they’re attacking with rockets
Don’t frighten her
Tell her only a few of us have been killed
Tell her the army has come to our defence
Don’t tell her her cousin refused to serve in the army.
Don’t tell her how many of them have been killed
Tell her the Hamas fighters have been killed
Tell her they’re terrorists
Tell her they’re filth
Don’t
Don’t tell her about the family of dead girls
Tell her you can’t believe what you see on television
Tell her we killed the babies by mistake
Don’t tell her anything about the army
Tell her, tell her about the army, tell her to be proud of the army.
Tell her about the family of dead girls, tell her their names why not, tell her the whole world knows why shouldn’t she know?
Tell her there’s dead babies, did she see babies?
Tell her she’s got nothing to be ashamed of.
Tell her they did it to themselves.
Tell her they want their children killed to make people sorry for them, tell her I’m not sorry for them, tell her not to be sorry for them, tell her we’re the ones to be sorry for, tell her they can’t talk suffering to us.
Tell her we’re the iron fist now, tell her it’s the fog of war, tell her we won’t stop killing them till we’re safe, tell her I laughed when I saw the dead policemen, tell her they’re animals living in rubble now, tell her I wouldn’t care if we wiped them out, the world would hate us is the only thing, tell her I don’t care if the world hates us, tell her we’re better haters, tell her we’re chosen people, tell her I look at one of their children covered in blood and what do I feel? Tell her all I feel is happy it’s not her.
Don’t tell her that.
Tell her we love her.
Don’t frighten her.

_________________________________________________________________

7 Muslim Children

1 (circa 900)
Tell him how wonderful it is
Tell him that we won
Tell him about the swords and the rivers of blood
Don’t tell him about the swords and the blood
Tell him we’re doing it in the Name of the Prophet
Tell him they will all convert or be dhimmis
Don’t tell him about dhimmis
Tell him this will all be ours forever
Tell him al-Andalus is Dar al-Islam

2 (circa 1800)
Tell him how we used to rule
Tell him how the world changed
Tell him it was the Europeans’ fault
Don’t tell him it was the Europeans’ fault
Tell him we will go back to al-Andalus and all the other lands one day
Don’t tell him about al-Andalus

3 (circa 1900)
Tell him the Jews are coming back
Don’t tell him the Jews are coming back
Don’t tell him they were ever here
Tell him they’ve always been here
Don’t tell him they’ve always been here
Tell him they want to live as a free people
Tell him they are buying the land
Don’t tell him they’re buying the land
Tell him they’re stealing our land
Tell him they love the land and are draining the swamps
Tell him we want to live where they have built hospitals and schools and roads
Don’t tell him that we didn’t build anything
Don’t tell him they love the land
Don't tell him they have prayed every day for hundreds of years to return to the land

4 (1948)
Tell him to get his gun
Tell him to shoot the Jews
Tell him to block the road
Tell him to shoot the convoys
Tell him they can’t have a country here
Tell him we were going to have a country too
Don’t tell him we were going to have a country too
Tell him the Jews will slaughter him
Tell him about Deir Yassin
Tell him about Deir Yassin
Tell him about Deir Yassin
Don’t tell him about Kfar Etzion
Don’t tell him about Latrun
Don’t tell him about “itbach-al-Yahud”
Tell him “itbach-al-Yahud”
Tell him we will drive them into the sea

5 (1967)
Tell him we’re going to go back
Tell him we’re going back to Jaffa one day
Don’t tell him we’re never going back to Jaffa
Tell him our Arab brothers will help us
Don’t tell him our Arab brothers refuse to help us
Tell him how our Arab brothers kicked out all their Jews
Don’t tell him that the Zionists took in their Jews
Don’t tell him why we can’t leave the camp
Don’t tell him why we can’t live in Cairo, or Beirut, or Damascus
Don’t tell him that it's because they hate us
Tell him they are doing this for our own good
Tell him they will help us go back to Jaffa
Tell him we’re going to go home soon
Tell him Nasser will take us home
Tell him the armies are ready
Tell him the Jews are scared
Tell him we will slaughter all of them
Don’t tell him we will slaughter all of them, even the children
Don’t tell him…..that we lost again
Don’t tell him that they’ll give it all back for peace
Tell him “no, no, no”

6 (2002)
Tell him to put on the bomb belt
Tell him he will have 72 virgins
Don’t tell him that he must die
Don’t tell him that he must kill children
Tell him the Jews aren’t human
Tell him they’re the sons of apes and pigs
Tell him they are infidels in Dar al-Islam
Tell him they let their women be free
Tell him their gays are free
Don’t tell him their gays are free (just in case…)
Tell him Allah will bless him
Tell him we will call him a hero
Don’t tell him how they will die
Don’t tell him how they will be scarred
Don’t tell him they have parents too
Don’t tell him they offered us a country again
Tell him they have no right to a country
Tell him it’s better to die than to admit it
Tell him how we danced in the streets on 9/11
Don’t tell him we danced in the streets on 9/11
Tell him it’s better to kill them than live with them

7 (2008)
Tell him to launch the rockets
Tell him to use the school yard
Don’t tell him to use the school yard
Tell him they’re afraid to fire back because the world will hate them
Don’t tell him they might fire back anyway
Tell him they must all die
Don’t tell him they might attack
Tell him we’re living in the Warsaw Ghetto
Tell him what the Warsaw Ghetto was
Don’t tell him what really happened in the Warsaw Ghetto
Don’t tell him about Auschwitz and Treblinka
Tell him they’re afraid of us and won’t attack us
Tell him we can shoot off rockets forever.
Tell him if he’s lucky the rocket will hit a kindergarten
Tell him “itbach-al-Yahud”
Tell him “Filastin hi arduna, Wa al-Yahud kilabuna”
Tell him we will go back to al-Andalus
In the Name of the Prophet

Notes:

all definitions, unless otherwise hyperlinked, are from mideastweb.org

Andalus: Al Andalus (Spain), and other former Muslim conquests are considered by radical Islamists to be Islamic lands lost to the infidels.

Dar al-Islam: Dar al Islam (Arabic: دار الإسلا) is the area of the world under the rule of Islam , literally, "the home of Islam" or "the home of submission." This is often used by extremists to include areas that used to be part of the Muslim world such as Al-Andalus (Spain) as well as the Muslim world.

Deir Yassin a village near Jerusalem, site of a massacre by Jewish Irgun/Lehi forces (April 9, 1948)

Dhimmi: (Arabic: ذمي) (often pronounced "Zimmi") are Christians, Jews, and sometimes Zoroastrians and people of other faiths living in a Muslim state and enjoying special protection not afforded to other non-Muslims. Dhimmi are supposed to wear special dress and pay the jizyah tax. They are exempt (or rather forbidden) from fighting and from paying the Muslim Zakah tax. The dhimmi were often forced to wear special dress. A dhimmi could not testify against a Muslim in a court of law, meaning that non-Muslims had virtually no legal relief against injustice by Muslims. Many Dhimmi converted, usually because of the social pressure, but also because of forced conversions under various Muslim rulers.

“Filastin hi arduna, Wa al-Yahud kilabuna”: Arabic for "Palestine is our land, and the Jews are our dogs."
Itbach-al-Yahud: Arabic for “slaughter the Jews”;
Both were chanted by Arabs during the 1920 Nebi Musa pogrom and on many occasions since then, including at anti-Israel demonstrations in the US

Kfar Etzion site of a massacre of surrendered Jewish defenders by Palestinians on May 14, 1948

Latrun is the site of a fort and monastery. The position was controlled by the Jordan Legion in 1948, and enforced the blockade of Jewish Jerusalem by the Arab forces.

The IDF Must Hold Fire

2009-03-30T21:59:00.000-07:00

The latest furor over supposed Israeli war crimes in Gaza has once again followed the classic pattern: a charge made without any evidence later proves to be unverifiable, Israel is put in the untenable position of trying to prove the negative statement, the world media trumpets the charges in bold page 1 headlines, and when the facts are made available, corrections are published in small print well on the inside. The only difference from the alleged Jenin "massacre" is that this time the charges were made by Israelis-- published in English rather than in Hebrew to make it clear that they were playing for the world media rather than attempting to have a serious public discourse within Israel.
Of course, for the next few years anti-Israel websites and public demonstrations will prominently feature "IDF War Crimes" as part of their many grievances against Israel. But focusing on what did and didn't happen, while important both for the historical record and for Israelis who want to know that their sons behaved morally, really isn't the essence of the issue. After all, in every single war there are soldiers who have indeed behaved immorally; in every single war, civilians are killed either by scared teens armed with weapons, by angry soldiers who just watched their friend get blown into small bits, or by human error when shells didn't get aimed where they were intended. And when fighting against an enemy that doesn't hesitate to use human shields, that cynically uses schools as rocket launching pads and hospitals as military headquarters, that tells its own population that the highest calling they can seek is to become martyrs, civilian casualties are bound to be higher.
So what IS the essence of the issue? It's those who are opposed to any defensive action Israel takes, regardless of the provocation, regardless of the rationale, regardless of the situation where one side is clearly told that its fate is to be exterminated. It's well summarized on this sign displayed at the anti-Israel protest in San Francisco during the Second Lebanon War:

Hezbollah or Hamas can murder Israeli civilians at will, can rain rockets down over the entire country, and can blow up buses and cafes. But the IDF? It--and only it-- must hold fire. That's the message that is really being delivered to Israel. Double standards, anyone?

photo courtesy of Zombie

The Berkeley Daily Planet-- Superman Certainly Doesn't Work Here

2009-03-27T15:01:00.000-07:00

Berkeley is the home of the University of California, the spawning grounds of the Free Speech Movement and the People's Park riots, and the site of some of the most left-wing politics within any American city (hence the nickname "Bezerkley"). While we previously wrote about anti-Israel activism on the UC campus and its insinuation even into Berkeley Hillel itself, there's another Berkeley institution that helps bring anti-Israel hate speech into print just about every week. The Berkeley Daily Planet (the "DP") doesn't employ Clark Kent, the mild-mannered alter ego of Superman; it is, however, owned and edited by one Becky O'Malley. And Ms. O'Malley has decided that of all the issues Berkeley residents care about, whether local, national or international, the one that deserves a wholly disproportionate amount of space (in particular in the letters to the editor) is....you guessed it: Israel.

And these aren't ordinary letters from ordinary Berkeley residents. These are screeds from around the world, spewing the type of hatred that is politically correct when aimed at only one group of people: Zionists. There is a new website, the DP Watchdog, which documents quite well the selective publication of anti-Israel hate speech in the DP-- but to give you, our reader, just a brief flavor of what O'Malley feels is worthy of appearance in the DP:

"One should ask why anti-Semitism has persisted throughout the centuries. Let us go back to 539 BC, when Cyrus the Great, King of Persia, went to Babylonia and liberated Jews. One can ask why Jews were enslaved by Babylonians. Also, one can ask why Jews had problem with Egyptians, with Jesus, with Europeans, and in modern times with Germans? The answer, among other things, is their racist attitude that they are the 'Chosen People.' Because of this attitude, they do wrong to other people to the point that others turn against them, namely, become anti-Semite if you will." (note that this letter came all the way from India to appear in the DP, but O'Malley refuses to publish pro-Israel letters from outside Berkeley and environs).

"Anyone in Congress who supports this genocide does not represent me and many others in this country. Destroying a country’s infrastructure, killing millions of innocent civilians, including children, is inexcusable. I will never vote for anyone who supports this insanity. What Israel is doing to Lebanon is worse than what Hitler did in Germany. Hezbollah is merely an excuse for Israel to wipe out Palestine." (this was in reference to Israel's response to Hezbollah's missile attacks in 2006; note that she did write "millions")

"To what country does John G [note: a pro-Israel letter writer] owe his loyalty?… Would he spy for Israel? (It’s been done.) Would he perjure himself for Israel? (That’s been done too.) Would he threaten a political candidate with slush funds and slur campaigns? (Threats like Mr. G’s are not idle. They’ve been carried out successfully many times.) Would he protect Israel when it had deliberately killed American citizens? (Sadly, this too has been done.) Would he carry a bomb onto the New York subway or BART, if Israel deemed it necessary? How far would Eric Alterman go? How far would John go?"

Interestingly enough, O'Malley has also claimed that she has refused to publish items that she regarded as Islamophobic. (Zionists, it seems, are fair game; after all, we don't tend to burn, pillage or take to the streets to threaten mass murder over perceived slights to our heritage).

This week's edition of "j", the Jewish weekly in published in San Francisco, features a story about the DP. You can register and leave comments as well. We hope that those businesses who still advertise in the DP will be taking notice.

Standing Up For Zionism and Justice at UC Berkeley

2009-03-21T23:17:00.000-07:00

The following is an editorial published in the UC Berkeley student newspaper, the Daily Cal, written by Yonatan Weinberg. Yoni is a member of the pro-Israel student group Tikvah.

In a previous post we circulated a speech by another one of the Tikvah students, at the beginning of the recall process against ASUC student Senator John Moghtader that has now been shown to have been based on outright lies by pro-Palestinian students. Yoni's Op-ed, like Matt's speech, needs no further comment except "Yasher Koach".

Israeli Apartheid Week Mirrors Recall

By Yonatan Weinberg Contributing WriterFriday, March 20, 2009

We're in Berkeley, where I know the Bible isn't very popular, but I think a line from Deuteronomy has suddenly become very relevant to students at Cal. "Justice, Justice, you shall pursue" it reads, and now, more than ever, is the time to pursue justice.
During the first week of March, Tikvah: Students for Israel put on Israeli Peace and Diversity Week. We hosted a variety of events celebrating the diversity that exists in the State of Israel as well as the nation's desire for peace with its neighbors. We hosted Israeli basketball star LaVon Mercer, an African-American who moved to Israel to play professional basketball and who, after falling in love with the country, decided to become an Israeli citizen himself. We had displays on Upper Sproul Plaza educating people about the unparalleled LGBT rights in Israel and the country's tremendous aid to refugees. We also screened a movie about an Ethiopian boy who escaped to Israel, where a Jewish family took him in as their own.
While we sought to engage the campus in a positive series of educational events, a different group, Students for Justice in Palestine, was once again spreading hate, misinformation and negativity across our campus. When they weren't misleading students about what's going on in the Middle East, they were busy spreading vicious lies about a fellow student in a malignant effort to further their extremist agenda on our campus. Israeli Apartheid Week and the SJP-CalSERVE led recall of John Moghtader are more linked than you might think, and they reveal a disturbing trend that exists on our campus. We have allowed malicious lies from SJP and their cohort CalSERVE to go unchecked for far too long. These destructive and divisive groups are forcing Berkeley in a direction that we don't want to be going.
In the face of injustice, we Cal students cannot simply look the other way. We cannot simply accept that what we hear is the truth. Rather, it is essential as independent thinkers to seek out the truth, to stand up, and to challenge. The SJP-planned, CalSERVE-promoted, smear campaign against Israel during Israeli Apartheid Week mirrors their smear campaign against Senator Moghtader: They simply spewed lies about a person or party and hoped that they would stick. And as we've seen lately, their claims about what happened on November 13th in Eshleman Hall turned out to be false.
It's ironic that the Students for Justice in Palestine have complete disregard for justice. Justice is not smearing an innocent man for personal gain. Justice is not lying to the student body and wasting $20,000 of student fees to achieve your own dastardly schemes.
It is time for the students of UC Berkeley to stand up and make a statement. We demand honesty from our ASUC officials, not the enabling of corruption and injustice like those that were committed by the dangerous CalSERVE machinery, from current President Roxanne Winston down to executive candidate and SJP member Kifah Shah. We demand honest reporting to UCPD, not the blatantly falsified reports that were given by students desperately trying to implicate John. Finally, we demand honesty when student groups promote their causes, not the predictable hate-filled rhetoric that took place during Israeli Apartheid Week.
Let us hope that we can learn from the corruption and deceit that SJP-CalSERVE plagued our campus with this year. We must hold them accountable. It is our responsibility to leave this campus in better shape than when we arrived. We must throw out the wrong, and pursue what is right. Justice, Justice we shall pursue.

Chas Freeman--It's Not Over Yet

2009-03-11T19:53:00.000-07:00

(this piece was written by Lawrence W. White)

Charles Freeman, a former ambassador to Saudi Arabia, is the diplomat chosen several weeks ago by the administration to chair the National Intelligence Council.

Problems immediately arose. Freeman was in the paid service of Saudi Arabia, had repeatedly blasted Israel, had defended China including its actions in the Tiananmen Square massacre, and had numerous conflicts of interest. Prior to the appointment he had not been fully vetted, and any examination of his finances had not occurred. As a result, the selection became controversial as soon as Freeman’s name became public.
As a result of these issues, opposition to his nomination arose among several members of Congress, as well as parts of the media and ordinary citizens. This led to his withdrawing his nomination after several weeks of controversy. Whether he withdrew or was pushed is not clear at this time.
Opposition to Freeman was initially attributed to his many statements blaming Israel for the current crisis and absence of peace in the Middle East. However, what led to his demise were not primarily considerations related to Israel but rather the exposure of Freeman’s many statements apologizing for Saudi and Chinese behavior as well as a whole panoply of foreign policy conflicts.
These included his 12 year chairmanship of the Middle East Policy Council which was a Saudi-funded front group, and his chairmanship of Projects International, a group that represented U.S. business interests in Saudi Arabia and China. Freeman fully supported the repressive government of China. He criticized a Tibet protest against China as a “race riot”, and stated that China should have intervened earlier in the Tiananmen Square protests. But the major feature of his support for China was his paid role on the board of a Chinese government-owned oil company that had dealings in Iran. This same Chinese oil company also purchased oil from Sudan while its leaders were overseeing genocide in Darfur. There were no objections from Freeman about any of this
Following the withdrawal, a collective sigh of relief was uttered by those who opposed him. However, it is not yet time to uncork the champagne. For those of us in opposition, we should not expect this problem to disappear. The fact that a group of citizens along with members of Congress mobilized to put pressure on the administration to halt the nomination clearly represents an age-old use of the democratic right to petition government. However, it also opens the door to new charges of pressure from the Israel lobby.
We have heard this before, from Jimmy Carter, Stephen Walt, and John Mearsheimer, from the likes of such hateful demagogues as Norman Finkelstein, and even from Jewish groups such as J Street who falsely label themselves as pro-Israel. This time, joining the cries of criticism of the so-called “Israel Lobby” are many new and surprising names, including Andrew Sullivan, and M J Rosenberg of the Israel Policy Forum,
Certain historical events become symbols. The USS Liberty tragic friendly fire incident in 1967 became the causus belli for the anti-Israel zealots and has been so for over 40 years. Now the Freeman case is about to become the poster child for those who preach against the “Israel lobby”.
Freeman himself has initiated the process. In a note to Foreign Policy, ABC news has reported that Freeman attacked the Israel lobby, claiming that the destruction of his career “will be seen by many to raise serious questions about whether the Obama administration will be able to make its own decisions about the Middle East and related issues."

Here are Freeman’s words.

"The libels on me and their easily traceable email trails show conclusively that there is a powerful lobby determined to prevent any view other than its own from being aired, still less to factor in American understanding of trends and events in the Middle East. The tactics of the Israel Lobby plumb the depths of dishonor and indecency and include character assassination, selective misquotation, the willful distortion of the record, the fabrication of falsehoods, and an utter disregard for the truth. The aim of this Lobby is control of the policy process through the exercise of a veto over the appointment of people who dispute the wisdom of its views, the substitution of political correctness for analysis, and the exclusion of any and all options for decision by Americans and our government other than those that it favors."

The inability of the American public to discuss, or the government to consider, any option for US policies in the Middle East opposed by the ruling faction in Israeli politics has allowed that faction to adopt and sustain policies that ultimately threaten the existence of the state of Israel. It is not permitted for anyone in the United States to say so. This is not just a tragedy for Israelis and their neighbors in the Middle East; it is doing widening damage to the national security of the United States."

Now what is going on here? Congress, the media, good government organizations, and various special interest groups, have always evaluated candidates for high government office with great scrutiny. In this case as in others, the candidates own words were examined in full context. But as Jake Tapper of ABC News has pointed out, “only in Freeman's case does the nominee make an allegation that a foreign power was lurking nefariously somehow behind it all.”

For Freeman, this represents a different and more lucrative kind of career move than the one he had originally expected. He is now following in the footsteps of Jimmy Carter, Ramsey Clark, Charles Lindbergh, and others who have made a profitable career out of travelling the lecture circuit blaming Jews and peddling tales of conspiracy. This is what Richard Hofstadter labeled “the paranoid style in American politics”, and it has great appeal for angry minds.
Most Jewish and pro-Israel organizations took no public stance on the nomination, and there was apparently little lobbying of Congress. Nonetheless, Freeman’s son, Charles Freeman Jr., a former assistant U.S. Trade Representative for China Affairs., referred to his father’s critics as “Israel first-ers” and stated that his father’s “appointment is being challenged these days by a small cabal of folks that believe first and foremost in the importance of allegiance to Israel as a core U.S. priority.”
An irony in all this is that according to several members of Congress, the concerns about his anti-Israel positions did not, and would not, stop his official appointment to chair the NIC. Rather, it was Freeman’s comments on China and Tibet, and his connections to the Chinese oil company, that finally did him in.
None of Freeman’s critics claimed that he was not entitled to hold these opinions on Israel, China and he Middle East. . What they claimed that he was not entitled to do is to hold these judgments and allegiances, and at the same time make official analyses and reach conclusions for the US government on critical intelligence matters.
This raises an age-old question for American Jews. Is it useful to try to prevent this sort of appointment, or will it, as MJ Rosenberg claims, be dangerous in that it feeds resentment of Jews in official circles? WE have a different experience during World War 2, when the Roosevelt administration was supported by most of the Jewish community. Opposition to Roosevelt’s policies regarding restrictions on intake of the doomed European Jews was virtually non-existent. At that time, the roles of Jimmy Carter, Stephen Walt, and John Mearsheimer, were taken by Charles Lindberg, Henry Ford, and Father Coughlin.
In the 1930s and 1940s Jews were primarily motivated by the fear of creating an anti-Semitic backlash. The prevailing view of the Jewish community was to maintain a low profile and do nothing that might annoy the powers in Washington, (This is the position of MJ Rosenberg today).
At present, the Jewish community can see the results of a more aggressive posture. We now know the benefits of publicly speaking out, of lobbying, and using our rights as citizens. All indications are that this is a far healthier stance. However, this behavior is about to be tested.

A response to the organizers Israel Apartheid Week at UC Berkeley

2009-03-06T08:59:00.000-08:00

This piece, by Ishmael Khaldi, originally appeared in the San Francisco Chronicle.
http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2009/03/04/EDRP168GMT.DTL&hw=ishmael&sn=001&sc=1000

For those who haven’t heard, the first week in March has been designated as Israel Apartheid Week by activists who are either ill intentioned or misinformed. On American campuses, organizing committees are planning happenings to once again castigate Israel as the lone responsible party for all that maligns the Middle East.

Last year, at UC Berkeley, I had the opportunity to “dialogue” with some of the organizers of these events. My perspective is unique, both as the vice consul for Israel in San Francisco, and as a Bedouin and the highest-ranking Muslim representing the Israel in the United States. I was born into a Bedouin tribe in Northern Israel, one of 11 children, and began life as shepherd living in our family tent. I went on to serve in the Israeli border police, and later earned a master’s degree in political science from Tel Aviv University before joining the Israel Foreign Ministry.

I am a proud Israeli - along with many other non-Jewish Israelis such as Druze, Bahai, Bedouin, Christians and Muslims, who live in one of the most culturally diversified societies and the only true democracy in the Middle East. Like America, Israeli society is far from perfect, but let us deal honestly. By any yardstick you choose - educational opportunity, economic development, women and gay’s rights, freedom of speech and assembly, legislative representation - Israel’s minorities fare far better than any other country in the Middle East

So, I would like to share the following with organizers of Israel Apartheid week, for those of them who are open to dialogue and not blinded by a hateful ideology:

You are part of the problem, not part of the solution: If you are really idealistic and committed to a better world, stop with the false rhetoric. We need moderate people to come together in good faith to help find the path to relieve the human suffering on both sides of the Israel-Palestinian conflict. Vilification and false labeling is a blind alley that is unjust and takes us nowhere.

You deny Israel the fundamental right of every society to defend itself: You condemn Israel for building a security barrier to protect its citizens from suicide bombers and for striking at buildings from which missiles are launched at its cities - but you never offer an alternative. Aren’t you practicing yourself a deep form of racism by denying an entire society the right to defend itself?

Your criticism is willfully hypocritical: Do Israel’s Arab citizens suffer from disadvantage? You better believe it. Do African Americans 10 minutes from the Berkeley campus suffer from disadvantage - you better believe it, too. So should we launch a Berkeley Apartheid Week, or should we seek real ways to better our societies and make opportunity more available.

You are betraying the moderate Muslims and Jews who are working to achieve peace: Your radicalism is undermining the forces for peace in Israel and in the Palestinian territories. We are working hard to move toward a peace agreement that recognizes the legitimate rights of both Israel and the Palestinian people, and you are tearing it down by falsely vilifying one side.

To the organizers of Israel Apartheid Week I would like to say:

If Israel were an apartheid state, I would not have been appointed here, nor would I have chosen to take upon myself this duty. There are many Arabs, both within Israel and in the Palestinian territories who have taken great courage to walk the path of peace. You should stand with us, rather than against us.

Ishmael Khaldi is deputy consul general of Israel for the Pacific Northwest.

Zionism, feminism and fueling the fires of self determination.

2009-02-15T11:14:00.000-08:00

Recent reports of the far left anti-Semitism are shocking but not surprising.
http://www.adl.org/ADL_Opinions/Anti_Semitism_Domestic/JewishNewsweekly_021309.htm

Feminist author Letty Cottin Pogrebin has written extensively on this phenomenon, detailing incidents of anti-Semitism, in of all places, the women’s movement. In her 1991 book, “ Deborah, Golda and me” she admits “Nothing has left me feeling quite as shocked and vulnerable as the discovery of anti-Semitism among feminists whom I had regarded as clear thinking allies and crusaders for social justice”

Pogrebin describes attending a conference in Mexico City in 1975, one of the first of 3 UN International Woman’s Decade conferences that passed a resolution effectively identifying all Jews as racists. Writing about the “Zionism is racism” resolution she points out the parallels in Zionism and feminism:

"I know Zionists who are racists just as I know racist feminists, but that doesn’t make Zionism racism any more than a few bigoted women make feminism racism. Moreover, one could say that Zionism is to Jews what feminism is to women. Zionism began as a national liberation movement and has become an ongoing struggle for Jewish solidarity, pride, and unity. Similarly, feminism, which began as a gender-liberation movement, has become an ongoing struggle for women’s solidarity, pride and unity. Just as feminism has been maligned and misunderstood by those who do not bother to understand it, so too has Zionism been maligned and misunderstood by its enemies....

Yet at the heart of the matter, Zionism and feminism are directly analogous in that both movements are fueled by the fires of self determination. Calling Zionism racism makes Jewish self-determination sound like an attack on non-Jews, which is comparable to calling feminism “anti-male”, as if female self-determination were an attack on men."

Pogrebin points out another similarity, “Traditionally, both women and Jews have been reluctant to confront our persecutors: women are afraid to rile the men in our lives: Jews to provoke the Gentile. We are good at self criticism. We are better at fighting for the rights of others- workers, children, central Americans, boat people, other minority groups- than standing up for our own."

Pogrebin understands identity politics much better than these folks http://www.bluetruth.net/2009/01/oscar-grant-becomes-poster-boy-for.html
She knows, as do all truly progressive thinkers, that the way to elevate the Palestinian people is not through rhetoric that preaches hate or the destruction of Israel. The Palestinians cannot be supported by tearing Israel down, physically or rhetorically. The only way to support them is by empowering them to throw off the yoke of their oppressive leadership- the patriarchal, theocratic extremists, who are the real obstacle to a just and lasting peace in the region.

Pogrebin suggests this formula for elevating debate:
* not to argue about who deserves the land more, but to agree that both peoples deserve a homeland.
* not to argue about who has suffered more, but to agree that both people have experienced tragedy.
* Not to argue about who's to blame, but to agree that both people have made mistakes
* not to argue about who has more reason to distrust, but to agree that both sides need peace
* not to ague about who killed more, but to ensure there is no more killing

True progressives on all sides of the issue would serve the cause of peace well by agreeing to these simple rules

Oscar Grant Becomes a Poster Boy for Jihad

2009-01-28T11:54:00.002-08:00

The event report below was contributed by our good friend Tzipporah, who now can't get back the several hours of her life that she gave up to subject herself to this event. But at least she is able to shed some light on what's crawling around in the political gutter in Oakland, California.

Those outside the Bay Area may not know the backstory: Early on January 1, a young adult African-American named Oscar Grant was fatally shot at a BART (Bay Area Rapid Transit) stop by a BART police officer. The incident was captured on a few cellphones as it happened. The officer has been arrested for murder and there have been several riots in downtown Oakland.

How is this connected to the recent action in Gaza, or to the Israel-Palestinian conflict in general? Nothing published about Grant suggested that he was politically involved in this issue. However, this incident has been cynically manipulated by the local anti-Israel groups to recruit support in the African-American community for their own jihadist agenda. So, to nobody's surprise, recent anti-Israel rallies in San Francisco featured posters attempting to link Grant's death to the Gaza situation, to recruit those angry over the shooting to the side of those for whom Grad and Qassam rockets are "legitimate resistance".

Here's Tzipporah's report from a "community meeting" held in Oakland 2 days ago. For upcoming attractions, just see what's been happening in France.

Violence Brewing in Oakland: A Forum to Incite African Americans to Hate Jews

Last night I fell down a rabbit hole and found myself in a world where honesty and truth were banished and lies reigned supreme. I was not out chasing rabbits though; I was at the Eastside Cultural Center in Oakland, along with about 200 other people, participating in a program called “From Palestine to Oakland: An Emergency Community Forum.”

The forum was co-sponsored by the Eastside Arts Alliance and the Gaza Action Committee. Speakers were from various anti-Israel organizations, such as the Arab Resource and Organizing Center, Malcolm X Grassroots Movement, Communities Against Police Execution (CAPE,) and Plan for a Safer Oakland (aka, CriticalResistance.org.) Many of the organizers looked familiar because I had seen them before, from other recycled ANSWER niche groups, such as Jews Against Zionism. The goal of the forum was to draw parallels between the so-called oppression of Palestinians and Oakland African Americans. This forum was clearly a slick attempt by anti-Israel groups to co-opt African Americans and draw them into the world wide movement against the existence of Israel and hatred of Jews.

Subtlety was not their strong point. First, three young people from the Eastside Arts Alliance and the Gaza Action Committee stood on the stage with crudely drawn maps of Oakland and Israel. In this rabbit hole, Israel was called Palestine. The speakers taught us that Palestine was once a great and peaceful Muslim country. But then in 1948 European Jews and the United States decided to work together to rid Palestine of Muslims and give the country to the Jews. These Jews are called Zionists: “Zionism: A political belief system started in the late 1800’s (sic) and based on parts of the Jewish religion that believes the land of Palestine was given by God to the Jewish People. (Not all Jews are Zionist and not all Zionists are Jewish). (sic)
The U.S and Zionist forces embarked upon genocide and ethnic cleansing because they felt that Palestine was in a strategic part of the world, and the U.S. and the European Jews wanted to have a foot-hold in the midst of the Muslim world. The speakers stuck pieces of paper with outlines of brown people on them all over the pre-Israel Palestine map. They added other pieces of paper symbolizing trees and orchards. When they declared that it was now 1948, they moved all the people to Gaza and the West Bank and filled the map with a dozen or so large blue Stars of David which took the place of the displaced Palestinians who were presumably huddling in fear on the edges of the map. They added pictures of Uzi machine guns and barricades to the map.

They taught us that “war broke out in 1967,” and Israel conquered more Muslim land. They did not explain the cause of the war. To them, war simply “broke out,” perhaps as a bad case of the hives might break out.

We learned that Israel was founded “with the purpose of creating a ‘Jewish only’ state even though the vast majority of the population was not Jewish. They told us that Muslims have curfews in Israel. Palestinians must carry ID cards that designate what limited rights they are entitled to. Only Jews have the full panoply of rights.

Then they asked the audience to make the connection to Oakland. Think, they exhorted us, how the same forces that oppress the Palestinians also oppress the Black people in Oakland. I wondered if Zionists control Oakland. Why yes, I learned, they apparently do. They moved the brown people from “occupied Palestine” to the map of Oakland. They pointed to Piedmont and stuck a couple of Stars of David there. Then they surrounded the brown, oppressed Oaklanders with the Uzis and placed barricades around Piedmont and other areas they considered to be Zionist identified.

The audience loved it. They were very receptive to this blatant anti-Semitism and Palestinian mythology. My heart was thumping and I was certain that the word “JEW” was written on my forehead. I kept my pepper spray handy. The crowd was pumped up - lots of cheering and clapping. Two hundred happy Jew-haters surrounded me.

The remaining speakers revealed the following amazing facts:
1. The CIA and the Mossad are one big organization;
2. Oakland and Boston Police go to Israel for training (this factoid was imparted by a member of the New England Committee to Defend Palestine;)
3. Members of the IDF come to Oakland to train police;
4. During Hurricane Katrina, the Mossad sent Israeli snipers to New Orleans with orders to shoot black people “who were trying to survive;”
5. Palestine is Oakland;
6. The condos in Oakland are equivalent to the Jewish settlements in Israel, because Black people were pushed out of gentrified areas of Oakland the way the gentle Palestinians were pushed out of Palestine;
7. A speaker who identified herself as Nicole Solis said she is a teacher at a rich private school in Oakland. She described the school as a bubble for privileged kids. She said she is not permitted to talk about the things that really matter, such as graffiti art, Zionists, and guns;
8. Black people dressed in baggy pants are targets for Oakland police who are itching to kill them;
9. Oakland is heavily policed because Black people live here. The police are here to occupy the Black neighborhoods and commit genocide. Their presence has nothing to do with crime. The Oakland police are equivalent to the Jews in Israel;
10. Palestinians and American Blacks have one enemy: the U.S. Actually two enemies, because Israel is an extension of the U.S.
11. Palestinians cannot walk more than 30 minutes without violating a curfew;
12. The same Israeli people building the “wall” in Palestine are also building the “wall” between the U.S. and Mexico;
13. Gang members are now prosecuted as domestic terrorists. (As a criminal defense lawyer in Oakland, I know this is not true;)
14. Their definition of occupation is an outside power coming into a neighborhood, city, or country by military or police force, conquering the native people, and then forcing them off their land. In Oakland, this is achieved by gentrification. Gentrification is occupation;
15. Tel Aviv was an Arab city. The Zionists changed the name as part of their colonization of Palestine;
16. Schools in the U.S. should teach Arab history;
17. Oakland schools teach that slavery was a good thing and slaves were happy;
18. Palestinian and Black leaders are kept illegally in prisons so they cannot organize the people;
19. The first thing Israel does when they attack a village is to destroy the agriculture, such as the olive trees;
20. Federal police working with Oakland police intend to destroy Black culture;
21. COINTELPRO is actively trying to divide Black and Palestinian people in order to disrupt their organizing;
22. An Israeli PR firm in San Francisco is trying to entice people from grassroots organizations to visit Israel in order to feed them false information;
23. “They” do not want us to make the connections between what is happening in Palestine and Oakland;
24. Jews have invented creation myths of persecution in order to justify the genocide and colonization of Palestinians;
25. Oscar Grant represents persecution, resistance, and a great wave of grief, and love;
26. Myths are perpetuated in churches and temples to control the people;
27. Jews paint themselves as eternal victims;
28. The Committee Against Police Execution (CAPE) defends the right of people to come together to destroy property. The people who were arrested in the Oscar Brand riots should have all charges dropped against them, and the Oakland police chief should be fired.
Several times during the meeting, we were urged to attend a demonstration later in the week on the Berkeley campus to protest a lecture by Benny Morris. They reminded us several times that violence is an acceptable response to “justice denied.”

After 90 minutes of this anti-Semitic rubbish, I left. The red queen was on her head.

Speech by Rabbi Jonathan Sacks in Trafalgar Square, January 11

2009-01-15T10:55:00.000-08:00

Rabbi Jonathan Sacks is the Chief Rabbi of the United Hebrew Congregations of the Commonwealth (Great Britain). He spoke on January 11 at the pro-Israel rally in Trafalgar Square in London that was attended by over 10,000 people.

He gave a short but eloquent speech that stands in stark contrast to the hate-filled images and chants from pro-Palestinian rallies around the world. It deserves widespread dissemination, but needs no further comment on its eloquence.

We are gathered today, not in triumph but in tears.
Nothing that has happened in Gaza needed to happen.
All it took to avoid all the suffering
was for Hamas to end firing rockets on innocent Israeli civilians.
That's all.
And let a voice go out today from here in Trafalgar Square,
And from other gatherings today in Manchester, Paris and Washington -
as it has gone out from Israel since the day it was born, 60 years ago:
We want peace
Israel wants peace.
We who love Israel want peace.
No to terror -- yes to peace
Let there be an end to bloodshed and hate.
Let there be peace.
We say to those who criticise Israel:
You want Palestinian children to grow up with hope.
So do we
You want Palestinians to be able to live in dignity.
So do we
You want Palestinian parents to have work, income, and a life for their families.
So do we
When a great British Zionist, the late Dr David Baum,
President of the Royal College of Paediatrics,
a man who lived in Bristol but asked to be buried, as he was, in Israel, in Rosh Pinah, sought to give expression to his hopes for Israel,
he created a state-of-the-art child care facility.
Where? In Gaza.
He died on a sponsored cycle ride raising money
for paediatric facilities in Gaza.
When one of the finest young men of our community, Yoni Jesner, was killed in a suicide attack on Tel Aviv bus, his family donated his organs to save life, one of whom was a seven-year-old Palestinian girl
Yasmin Abu Ramila
who had been waiting two years for a transplant.
We care about the Palestinian future.
We care for Palestinian children.
We care about life.
And that is why we say to Hamas, who for years, day after day, have been endangering the lives of innocent people:
Stop killing the Palestinian future.
In 2005 Israel withdrew from Gaza.
It said to the people of Gaza: the land is yours.
The factories, the farms, the buildings our people built are yours.
The aid you seek in building an economy is yours.
That is when terror should have stopped.
Instead that is when the current wave of terror began.
The living nightmare for the people of Sderot and Ashdod and Ashkelon.
A ceaseless rain of rockets injuring and killing young and old,
the vulnerable, the innocent, who wanted nothing except peace.
There are young children in Sderot who have only known a life of living in bomb shelters.
Who can live like that?
When Jews built the land and state of Israel
The land where our ancestors lived for 4000 years,
They didn't want to fight with their neighbours.
They didn't want to spend a lifetime fighting war and fearing terror.
All they wanted to do was live.
And so we ask Hamas, and Hizbollah, and the countries that give them aid and arms,
Why do you want Israel to die?
Stop wanting Israel to die.
Start wanting your children to live.
There is one question that cries out for an answer.
Why, Hamas, do you hold in such contempt not just Israeli lives but Palestinian lives.
Why do you fire rockets from schools, store arms in hospitals, surround yourself with human shields?
Why have you consistently acted so as to maximise the death of innocent Palestinians?
In the words of Colonel Richard Kemp, reported in today's Sunday Times:
Senior military adviser to the British cabinet,
'Hamas deploys suicide attackers including women and children,
And rigs up schools and houses with booby trap explosives.
Virtually every aspect of its operations is illegal under international humanitarian law.
The Palestinian future will begin
The minute Hamas stops firing rockets on innocent Israelis.
The minute they try to stop killing the people whom they see as enemies but who want to live as friends.
The minute they stop endangering the Palestinian people by pursuing a policy that is blighting the Palestinian future.
Just say three words:
Yes to peace.
And a day will come when Israelis and Palestinians
Jews Muslims and Christians
The people of Sderot and the people of Gaza
Will live together in peace
No longer fighting one another
But helping one another to live in freedom and dignity.
That day will come.
It could be a hundred years away
Or it could be today.
It's up to Hamas and the countries that give it arms.
And for the sake of Palestinian children, and Israeli children,
Let it be today.
But in the meanwhile we say,
Beloved G-d
The G-d we worship
The G-d of life who told us to sanctify life
Al Rahman, the G-d of compassion
The G-d of Avraham, Ibrahim, father of our several faiths
Show us the way to live your way.
The way of Salaam,
The way of Shalom.
The way of Peace.

Let Barack Obama Hear Your Pro-Israel Voice

2009-01-12T22:53:00.000-08:00

As part of the transition to the Obama Administration next week, a website has been set up to seek citizen input on a variety of issues. As the website states, "Share your ideas on any issue facing the new administration, then rate or comment on other ideas. The best rated ideas will rise to the top -- and be gathered into a Citizen's Briefing Book to be delivered to President Obama after he is sworn in. "

Not surprisingly, the anti-Israel crowd is trying to stuff the figurative ballot box with their hysterical screeds. Here's a small sample from what's on there tonight:
" I agree, we had enough baby sitting of Israel. Israel should get out of our lap and should face the world for it's evil acts." (punctuation was never a strong point in the anti-Zionist movement)
"Israel has killed over 100 times as many people in the last couple weeks than all of those home made bottle rockets combined. They'd still be able to do that kind of damage without our F-17s, reactive armor, bombs, etc now that we've already given them access to our technology to reverse engineer." (a homemade bottle rocket that travels 25 miles and can explode a kindergarten? that's one hell of a bottle)
"So, the point that I am trying to make here is first of all, existance of Israel is illegal. We can give back the land to Palestinians and problem solved. No more killing, no more complaining. And, I bet you that if that happens, they will be living in peace, baby sitting for each other's kids as they were used to." (on his planet, do cows fly?)

If you are a US resident: go to citizensbriefingbook.change.gov and set up an account. Then search for "Israel". Vote proposals up or down as appropriate; that's more important than making comments, since the "vote" totals are apparently what they will pay attention to. Apparently the page refreshes every day, so go back daily.

MESSAGE FROM SF VOICE FOR ISRAEL

2008-12-29T15:59:00.001-08:00

What: Counter Protest in Support of Israel
Where: Israeli Consulate – 456 Montgomery Street, San Francisco
When: Tuesday, December 30, 2008 - 4:45pm

Dear Friends,

Israel is taking care of business in Gaza, and it is upon us to watch her back, here, on the streets of San Francisco. As we have seen from recent events in the region, PR war is a big part of this conflict, and "the streets" is where it’s fought, and no one will fight it but us.

Under the camouflage of "Peace Movement", the haters and the misguided will be holding a demonstration in front of the Israeli Consulate to protest the "Holocaust in Gaza". We ask, where were they for 3 years to "stand for peace" when Israelis were being bombed, killed and injured? We ask why are the fair-minded supporters of Palestinians not outraged by Hamas’s continuous provocations which clearly led to this defensive action, by its human shields tactics, and by its complete disregard for human life, both Israeli and Palestinian? We ask, what would United States, Turkey, Russia or China do, if 750,000 of its citizens were under constant cross-border shelling? We ask the questions that are at the heart of this conflict, the ones that no-one will ask if we are not there!

So be there, with your own questions and answers, and flags and energy, to show by our solid presence our unwavering solidarity with the Jewish State.

For signs to support Israel, please go to:
http://www.standwithus.com/SIGNS/?type=focus&wc=39
And
http://www.standwithus.com/SIGNS/?type=focus&wc=21

These posters are ready to send to your local printer. Please bring your own flags and signs, we have limited resources for this event.

Be the San Francisco Voice for Israel!

As always, feel free to make your own signs but please no signs or graphics offensive to any racial or ethnic group including but not limited to Arabs, Islam, or Palestinians. Signs in violation of our policies will not be allowed.