Speakers never called Israel evil
Thank you to Guy Gelbart for informing the wider Jewish community about our series: Steadfast Hope, the Palestinian Quest for Just Peace. For people interested in the topic of Israel/Palestine, we will offer other, similar programs in the future.
As one of the organizers and presenters of the series, I would like to point out a a few things:
1) The event was never intended as a dialogue or discussion group of various viewpoints on the conflict but rather a presentation of views less often heard in mainstream media and certainly not within the Jewish community. An event that attempts to find common ground and engages in peace-building within the Jewish community may be a worthwhile enterprise, however, it would be very different from our series. Some of us would love to attend such an event if and when it is organized.
2) The presenters’ perspectives were that most Palestinians, as well as most Israelis, are indeed good, kind and peace-seeking people. Guy’s contention that Israel was portrayed as an evil entity that needs to be destroyed is completely his conjecture. Criticizing Israeli policy and the occupation does not mean we want to destroy Israel, just as criticizing U.S. policies in Iraq and Afghanistan does not mean we want to destroy the United States.
3) The conundrum of how a state can be Jewish and democratic is not new and has been debated in the Knesset and elsewhere for many years. Avraham Burg, a former Knesset speaker and former head of the Jewish Agency, as well as other Jews and Israelis, have opined that the two attributes are not compatible.
4) The accusation about experimental weapons testing on Palestinian children is another conclusion Guy reached on his own from our mentioning the use of dense inert metal explosives and white phosphorous during Cast Lead, something that was well-documented in the Goldstone report and elsewhere.
What Guy apparently was looking for was that his version of the truth be heard: Israel can do no wrong and the Palestinians are to blame for everything. Bad things do not exist in the occupied territories and if they do, they are justified. This is exactly the message that our series was intended to debunk.
All of the above is debatable. However, most disturbing is Guy’s last paragraph, where, under the guise of a few rhetorical questions, he intimates that people like us, Jews who are outspoken and opposed to the occupation, have no place within the Jewish community. Questioning the democratic character of Israel and worse yet, supporting the Boycott, Divestment and Sanctions movement, makes those of us who are Jewish no longer legitimate. What chutzpah for Guy Gelbart, a representative of a foreign country, paid to represent the Israeli government here in our community, to weigh in on who should be part of the Jewish community in Tucson, Arizona.
—Dina Afek and Racheli Gai
The event was explicit in its advertisement in the newspaper as being a dialogue to address issues in Israel and the Palestinians. Many in the audience came to this series for exactly this purpose. The first question that was asked, when the audience was permitted to address the speakers, was what happened to the dialogue aspect of this series? It was then that the organizers stated, when they realized that they had opened a door to issues they could not control, that dialogue was never intended as a part of the series. Ms Afek stated, being quite explicit, that they intend to present their view and only their view. The issue as to whether their view was correct, factual, documented, or a fabrication was not to be addressed and it was irrelevant to their objectives. To put it more bluntly, Ms Afek, speaking for the JVP and the sponsoring organization calling itself an “International Peace” group stated that this was a propaganda session that was not concerned with anything except getting their message out.
Like many other events I have attended which have been hosted by these aligned organizations (and the leaders of many of them happen to be the same people) there never is discussion. Voices in opposition to their message are yelled down and intimidated by groups such as “Voices in Opposition”, JVP, Students for Justice in Palestine and, most sadly, Human Rights Watch and Amnesty International. The hypocrisy of these groups is surpassed only by the sanctimonious choice of names for the organizations which stand for neither peace nor human rights.
Ken Miller apparently fails to recall that the group presenting these five sessions was explicit in stating that indeed the May/June sessions were not intended as dialogue, although through one of the sponsors they were advertised as such. Just as many informational workshops or classes are simply not intended as dialogue, ours was not intended as one. We apologized for the misunderstanding and would be glad to participate in dialogues arranged by others.
Our interest was, and will continue to be,to bring forth well documented information, largely from Israeli entities but also from Palestinian, international, and ecclesial ones, showing the kinds of conditions imposed by Israel that have caused tremendous human suffering on the West Bank and Gaza. A two story high barrier wall keeping Palestinians from tending their own olive groves and maintaining their livelihoods. The building of a national park near Jerusalem over the sites of five razed Palestinian villages. One of our presenters came from one of those five villages so became a personal witness and pointed out on a map where his former home once stood. An aged Palestinian man explaining that he had waited so long at one of the Israeli checkpoints in the West Bank that his wife’s life ebbed away before his (and presumably the Israeli soldier’s) eyes and she died after hours went by in his attempt to get through the checkpoint and get her to hospital. These are not simply “casualties” of a simple conflict between two peoples. These are everyday events the Israeli government inflicts repeatedly and deliberately to intentionally disrupt and make traumatic, sorrowful and embittered the lives of Palestinians. The Israeli group ‘Machsom Watch” (Checkpoint Watch) has documented thousands of events similar to the ones just described.
Assertion of these and many other abuses makes one neither an anarchist nor a socialist. You can find this kind of information any day by reading the Israeli daily Ha-aretz, the website of the Israel Physicians for Human Rights, the much acclaimed human rights legal observers of B’Tselem, and so forth. As we repeatedly stated in our sessions, this information needs to be more readily available to Jewish readers in the US. Jews and other fellow travellers who are still dancing horas, eating the perennial falafel sandwich and singing old Jewish Agency songs, continue to respond and rant at least in public forums as if all is well and Israel is a shining beacon of justice, contentment and prosperity. But much has changed and refusing to see the forest for the trees will not change that fact.
Far from wishing away Israel’s existence, I believe Israel can and must become a state that recognizes and respects the human rights of ALL its peoples, if it is to be the democracy that it claims. I believe much of the audience for these sessions stated their hopes for the same. The strong reactions to these sessions by Mr. Miller and his companions demonstrates how far apart we are in our views but does not make us deserving of vilification. In a democracy there must be room for difference.
As one person who commented in the sessions how I openly supported a 2 State Solution and how I was/am against the settlements since 1974 while I was living in Israel I find Ms Melrood’s generalizations of me quite amusing. I also expressed my understanding and empathy with the Palestinian speaker who lost his home in the village of Emmaeus. But, I also criticized the misleading, and outright lies, of some of the propaganda being spouted and in the slide presentation. I commented how the picture of the “Illegal Jewish Settlement” was in fact a picture of Kfar Etzion, land that was legally owned by Jews prior to 1948 and which had been expropriated by Jordan, and then the Palestinians, after the Jewish Kibbutzniks surrendered and were then murdered by the Palestinian Irregulars during the 1948 war. I commented upon how both sides had injustices done to them in the land as in the 1920, 1930s and 1940s massacres and expulsions of Jews or in the massacres and expulsions that Palestinians experienced. I commented that justice for the Palestinians is not the answer but that there needs to be justice for both sides as there are 2 narratives, one Palestinians and one Jewish. All this, and more, was said by me when I had my turn to comment but Ms Melrood has lumped me into what she perceives as the evil Zionist supporters who did nothing but come to the event to disrupt and dissent.
I hold to all my comments about the sessions, the JVP and other organizations that participated and the organizations allied with them that have been involved in community and university demonstrations. I have been involved in viewing and dealing with these demonstrations many times. I have had hours of cordial discussions with Palestinian students, the one group that actually has an voice that reflects issues, at their display of the map of the West Bank and Gaza in relations to Israel. I have listened to the shouting down and rants of the Voices of Opposition, Human Rights Watch and Amnesty International for having disagreed with their views.
Yes, Ms Afek, Ms Gai as well as others unnamed do voice the things I said. Yes Ms Afek described herself in her introduction as being a born and raised Socialist/Marxist and her involvement in other organizations and events have shown her to be associated with anarchist causes and groups. Yes, Ms Gai, a born Israeli, is so full of venomous hate for Israel that it exudes into all the events I have attended including one where a Beduin Israeli was in Tucson and he was too intimidated by Gai to voice himself outside the private conversation we had.
Ms Melrood, there are injustices in Israel and the West Bank towards the Palestinians. Ms Melrood, there is Muslim fundamentalist terrorism thriving in the West Bank targeting Israel. Ms Melrood, Gaza has not one Israeli settler in it since 2005 yet this did not stop one day of Muslim terrorism and attacks on Israel. Ms Melrood, you and your cohorts who deem yourselves humanists need to become humanists in actions by admitting that the problem is not simply Israel but that there has been a problem that the Palestinians have contributed to at least 50% and that they need to find the leadership to help solve this. There will be 2 states, despite all the roadblocks that you and your associates keep putting in the way.
A few points I wish to make regarding Mr. Miller’s posts:
1 – Mr. Miller seems to lack the ability to differentiate between intense dislike and disapproval of Israeli policies, and an (alleged) hatred for the country and its people. I passionately disapprove of US policies; the wars it conducts in Iraq, Afghanistan, and etc.; Much of its domestic policies, and so on. That doesn’t mean I hate the US. In the same way, opposing Israeli policies does not mean I hate Israel.
2- Most of what Mr. Miller says amounts to name calling and assigning evil intent. The “venom”, I’m afraid, is in the eye of the beholder. It has become such a sorry commonplace (indeed, a policy…)that instead of arguing over issues the tactic of choice is to tear down one’s opponents.
In any case, what Mr. Miller and his associates think of my opinions is of little concern to me. What’s of real concern is twofold: A- That under the guise of being “pro Israel”, Jewish federations across America support policies that goad Israel along an exceedingly destructive path, one that simply can’t lead to security and peace for *anyone* because it denies equal rights to those who are not Jewish. And B- That there are efforts to silence dissent to Israeli Policies everywhere, including in this instance.
Once I and others have been smeared by choice terms such as ‘Marxist’! ‘Anarchist’! ‘Venomous’! … – is a dialogue really possible??
In reply to Ms Gai, no a dialogue is not possible in the number of times I have attempted it at events she was sponsoring. When I approached her after the the guest speaker and her group had finished the scheduled program I was looked at with contempt for disagreeing with her agenda and she was the one who precluded any degree of discussion. The word “venomous” with which I describe her position is quite accurate in my opinion and I am representing ONLY my position and not of that of the Federation. When someone disagrees with them it becomes “The Federation” is what is wrong and that it is a concerted and coordinated effort to marginalize her/them.
In regards to the use of the words “Marxist”, “Socialist” and “anarchist” these are words used by members of the JVP themselves in describing their own positions. Ms Afek used the first 2 words in her self introduction describing how she was raised by her family. The label of “anarchist” is openly used by one of the co-founders of the JVP to describe his positions and involvements. JVP equated the US/Mexico border fence at the UofA campus with the Israel Security Fence. Representatives of JVP (with Amnesty International and Human Rights Watch, as well as radical Latino groups) openly represented this on the campus and shouted down anyone who dared to challenge this false analogy or the multitude of misleading facts being posted on the chain link fence.
It is actions that preclude dialogue. Ms Gai, Ms Afek, their organizations are the people who have done their best to stifle dialogue and disagreement by using intimidation tactics and through a creation of a “story” that has been fabricated into “history” while refusing to discuss that other “histories” do exist.
Ms Gai says she does not care what I say or think. Yet, she and other members of the organization have posted many times in these threads of the AJP to try to brand me into being a proZionist bandit, someone who is spewing fabrications, someone who is representative of all the Federations, someone who spouts the party line, etc. If I am so inconsequential, as these people have made me out as, then why are 5 people posting replies repeatedly and basically saying the exact same thing over and over? The answer is that this is the same tactic used by their groups constantly, to brand me into the labels I mentioned and to disenfranchise anything I say as being propaganda. They are trying to quiet me through intimidation and this won’t succeed.