Sad Realities on the Ground - Palestinians Punish Their Own for Musical Outreach to Israelis

- - -

I am not sure how many of you are aware of this story - which can be found in today's Globe:

Palestinian camp leaders punish musical outreach to Israelis:
Youth orchestra shut down amid outcry of politics

http://www.boston.com/news/world/middleeast/articles/2009/03/30/palestinian_camp_leaders_punish_musical_outreach_to_israelis/

In a nutshell, a youth orchestra, led by a well meaning director trying to build bridges between Israeli's and Palestinians, was shut down when it was discovered the group played to a group of Holocaust survivors just outside of Tel Aviv.

Now in an effort to stem reactionaries on either side, I will comment from the gut then analyze from the head.

Having run similar programs in Israel, I will tell you point blank that these are two people's who do not get to interact and learn about each other often enough. It is a shame that such attempts are looked on - by hardliners on both sides mind you - as trivial nonsense that only exploits the idea of fluffy interaction with no real progress toward "deliverables" on either side. In other words, if it doesn't get us any land or any less violence today, why bother.

But let me expound for a moment on the real tragedy. And I will include my previously published op-ed in the Standard Times again since this was right on point.

This incident is a two part lesson I believe. And I will try to be fair to both sides as I spell it out. The shame of it all is not one-sided at all.

This story is first and foremost a reflection of the deep distrust that exists on both sides - AND NOT just on the extremes. There are wonderful moderates who can rise above it all - but for the most part, distrust is more widespread than many in this country know. Now that does not change the fact that most Palestinians and Israelis want a two state solution and on average are good, hardworking people somewhere in the middle of the political spectrum - just like in the United States. But distrust is a very human and much more pervasive feeling. One may not hate or hold violent thoughts toward another - but they can certainly distrust and believe myths and stereotypes. It is a basic sociological idea - that distrust is widespread but further beneath the surface in most cultures than hate and of course closer to the surface in cultures under duress. Israel and the territories qualify as "under duress" - especially post-Gaza - and the distrust is palpable.

So how does that distrust rear its ugly head? Well this incident is a great example of this and an excellent reason why a Two-State Solution to the conflict is the only avenue. Also, please notice I rarely say peace. The reason of course is this distrust. Even after an agreement would be reached. Peace will not ensue. Extremists will do everything they can to undo whatever the moderates have accomplished and tolerance and less violence is all we can really hope for in the near future. Rabin and modern day pragmatists get this. Peace is later - when generations who have experienced violence have a had chance to either calm down or frankly die away. Gruesome I know, but the truth. These modern pragmatists are also the people who believe in peace and still think the separation barrier is a good idea. Think of it as the referee in a boxing match coming between two fighters as they move to their corners. This is what the Israelis who built it and believe in it were thinking. They were most certainly not thinking of Warsaw or South Africa. They were thinking very practically about two cultures who distrust each other and who can't - and never have been able to - rely on the UN or any outside force to be an arbiter inside their borders. And if one thing is true in the middle east, appearances count for so much less than they do in the US. If the barrier is a good, pragmatic idea to some, there is no one who will be able to tell them how much it makes people feel bad, or reminds them of the Holocaust. Distrust is the reason it was built - and distrust is the reason it is so vilified.

DISTRUST. It is at the heart of it all and the clearest reason why the fairytale story of a single state solution with a joint Jewish and Arab Muslim parliament will never work. The two sides can just barely talk to each other - and the foolish proponents of this idea (those that are well meaning) think the two groups can govern together? Come on.

And for those who are not well meaning (who have no illusions of joint government but who are extremists and simply want one Jewish State or One Arab Muslim Majority State) they should be discredited for their disrespect to the narrative of each side.

But the second lesson is something that CAN NOT be dismissed by Americans or anyone around the globe.

As much as this conflict and 9/11 has created distrust of Arab Muslims around the world, there is a very real problem with distrust of Israel and of Jews in the Arab world that is rubbing off on others and rekindling the distrust of the pre-Holocaust era.

In the story of the orchestra, by claiming that the children were used for "political purposes" - readers should understand what that translates into.

In my op ed, I explain that any mention of the Holocaust in the context of the middle east generally evokes the following reactions from opponents of Israel:

1) The Holocaust is something the Jews have used since before the founding of Israel to gain sympathy from the world and rob land from the Arab's who lived in Palestine.

2) It is something they have continued to use to get money from the rest of the world and to deflect the debate over the legitimacy of Israel.

3) How can you talk about the Holocaust - ever - when Israel/Jews are doing the same thing to Palestinians and making them suffer in the same way.

4) And we are not even sure it happened. It is entirely possible it didn't and was just exaggerated for the purposes above.

If you read the original article about the orchestra above, you will hear many of those thoughts.

The "political" use the camp official speaks of is this. By having the students play for Holocaust survivors, it implies that the leaders of the camp/Palestinians:

1) Acknowledge the Holocaust happened.

2) Have sympathy for the pain of the survivors.

3) Acknowledge it as a legitimate reason for the founding of the state of Israel.

That is why the leaders are so upset.

But as my article indicates, why does any recognition or discussion of the Holocaust have to reflect back on Palestinians. Aside from the fact that many disagree categorically and are actually offended when the two are compared, why can't the Holocaust be discussed on its own and not immediately condemned as an effort of the Jewish/Pro Israel community to have their past pain trump the current pain of the Palestinians.

See op ed - A disconnect in the dialogue 'March 24, 2009' By David L. Cohen

http://www.southcoasttoday.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20090324/OPINION/903240315

Keep in mind there are people in the US who feel the same thing is true when any interfaith meeting is attempted. They believe that when you do this, you somehow say all the terrorism or extremism is OK. Well that is not right either.

And here is the other problem. If you have ever heard stories of the Jewish concentration camp orchestras playing for Germans, you will get another example of the distrust I spoke of above.

No matter what I say in these blogs. Palestinians on the ground have been convinced that the Jews in Israel are perpetrating another Holocaust. They see this kind of "stunt" with exactly the same lens as many Jews used when they would say that prisoners should not play for the Germans, because they would somehow be endorsing or denying the genocide.

But there-in lies the answer to my next question. How do we stop this distrust?

The work that I do and the passion that I have for this issue is just as much about ending the situation that creates this negative perception of Israel among Palestinians, while at the same time working toward ending the distorted perceptions and the false accusations.

The city of Jenin - no matter how many times you call it a "camp" is still in no way shape or form a concentration camp like the ones that existed during the Holocaust. People like to say that because it evokes the imagery that will grab the attention of progressives in America and bigots around the world. But by perpetuating that very real demonization of Israel and Jews, you never find out what Jenin is really like. You never find out that Jordan built the camp when they administered the West Bank and in the almost 20 years they had it under their control they never even thought of improving it or integrating the people into more humane communities. The Arab leaders wouldn't allow it - and 60 years later - we have cities that are not pleasant - not concentrations camps - but known the world over in just that way - as was the plan to gain the sympathy of the world.

DISTRUST. It is what keeps us in this stalemate. It is what perpetuates the conditions set up, maintained, and desired by Arab leaders in the early years of the conflict - to the point where no compromise among the parties today can be reached. It is what perpetuates the false perceptions and repeated reinventions of Israeli atrocities which feed the flames of the age old Blood Libel you can see in every Arabic Newspaper in the region.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Blood_libel_against_Jews

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Antisemitism_in_the_Arab_world

DISTRUST. It is what has people condemning the performance of Palestinian playing music for elderly Holocaust survivors in Tel Aviv - when as my program proved - this kind of activity is one of the only ways we can truly begin seeing each other through a lens other than the conflict.

- - -

Two Sides of the NCAA - Violations and Arena Atmosphere

- - -

Two things got my dander up during the latest rounds of the NCAA Basketball tourney.

This is of course in addition to the on-going failures of Petino and Calipari teams to hit free throws. (I mean they don't shoot them well during the year - why would anyone expect the results to be different in the tourney - isn't that the whole "definition of insanity" thing, doing the same thing but expecting different results?) Not that I'm bitter because of my brackets or anything.

The first thing was Coach Jim Calhoun's reaction to questions about rules violations that came up recently.

As allegations gain steam, Calhoun does his own Big Dance

http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/2009/writers/george_dohrmann/03/27/calhoun.sidesteps/index.html
Now, I generally like Jim and the program he has put together. I also had some sympathy for him when he was recently all over YouTube being attacked for his salary. But in a system of college sports that is regulated mainly to protect what's left of the "student athlete" myth, to publicly state that "in a 508 page manual - a mistake could have been made" is just sending the wrong message. This also coming from a man who has not been shy about condemning the recruiting practices of other coaches. The college basketball glass house is just too easily shattered these days.

So there is my defense of the NCAA. Now for the critique.

Requiring all courts to have uniform designs in the tourney is one thing. (Although the design was a bit plain.) But to ask all the arenas - like the garden - to take down all the banners is absolutely absurd. One of the draws for both spectators and players is to play in professional sports arenas - with all the decor and atmosphere. The banners of the garden and the accompanying feel give the players and fans such an added pump. It is just a shame this often stodgy and narrow minded organization had to over think this one too.

Seeing Through the Fog: Israel and Alleged Millitaty Abuses

- - -
I once sat in on a presentation given by "Combatants for Peace" called "Breaking the Silence." It is an interesting group and an interesting study in the polarization over the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. Their message is clear. ATROCITIES ARE NOT THE NORM - IN FACT THEY ARE THE RARE EXCEPTION TO THE RULE.

They are also clear about one other thing. Israeli soldiers can be young, inexperienced, stupid, and sometimes very racist. At times, because of the socialization that happens to many growing up in Israel, they are insensitive to the humanity of the Palestinians they interact with. This leads to mistreatment and is a recipe for misunderstanding, needless death, and an overall horrible situation. Now I happen to know this is true because of the work I have done in Israel, the military people I know who acknowledge this, and I know of the programs the army has put in place to address it. So its true. But the message of the group is still clear. Let's end the situation that makes it all happen. Let's get on with a two state solution, get us out of the West Bank, and stop this cycle of violence and resentment.

That is their message. Yet, for people on the far right - the hard line pro Israel side - their title is threatening because it seems to admit that there are secret atrocities going on. For the far left, they are adopted as the "proof in the pudding" that atrocities do happen and that even Israeli's think Israel is evil.

The interesting paradox is that their message is centrist but ends up spurring intense hostility between the polarized sides - as they attack each other with the message THEY THINK the group represents.

It is a real problem. In the presentation I sat in on, right after the speaker was done saying that atrocities are rare, and not the point of the presentation, a polite elderly woman began her question with "So given all these atrocities that are going on ...." I almost lost it.

What is clear is that no one is listening. No one is looking at the facts. No one is looking deeper into reports. We have our points of view and then just pontificate until we are blue in the face. As I like to say - we shout our monologues at each other instead of having any real dialogue. And what this means for all those confused folks in the middle is that they either get sucked in by one side's distortions, or they just tune out and want nothing more to do with the issue.

We can do better.

Here is an example.

Here is an article from the globe from today.

Israel disputing accounts of military abuses in Gaza
http://www.boston.com/news/world/middleeast/articles/2009/03/28/israel_disputing_accounts_of_military_abuses_in_gaza_1238215097/

To summarize the article. it brings up many points from my previous post. It reminds people that woman have been just as involved in the practices of wearing bomb laden vests, in running into soldiers with hand grenades, and carrying out all sorts of terrorist missions. It also speaks about the common use of no-go zones and that well, they are called that for a reason - you don't go there unless you want to get shot. Pretty clear.

But what it also talks about is the same message as "Combatants for Peace."
ATROCITIES ARE NOT THE NORM AND ANY GROUP THAT TRIES TO STATE OTHERWISE IS FULL OF IT.

It even reveals that the way these stories come to light is less through proof and eyewitness accounts and often more about urban legend and false accounts.

Now let me be clear - this does not negate the real tragedies and pain that do occur. But that is no reason to shy away from these VERY REAL ATTEMPTS TO DISTORT THE TRUTH AND DEMONIZE ISRAEL.

In case my readers are unaware - or just as a reference for others - here are two links to the al-Dura hoax exposed years ago - yet still used as a rallying cry against Israel.

Palestinian boy’s death staged
Network accused of manipulating video to show Israel using excessive force
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/21091254/
Second Draft - Journalism is the First Draft of History
http://www.seconddraft.org/

But to be fair in regard to the globe article, Israelis really don't talk enough about the troubles they have with their soldiers not being experienced enough, tolerant enough, or respectful enough. And even with that, I need to make clear that I have never been a soldier - but know that my saying that may sound hollow. It is the truth, as admitted by soldiers themselves, but that still does not account for the difficulties presented to these young boys on a daily, hourly and minute by minute basis. If you study any military or police sociological study - situations create behavior much more than behavior creates the situation.

A quick story to close:

A story from an Israeli colleague from One Voice - abridged

At a checkpoint - it was hot, people were upset (as is the norm), the line was long.
There was a misunderstanding over the proper paperwork help by a Palestinian Family.
The Father/Husband, clearly frustrated and upset in general with Israeli soldiers, put his hands on a soldier and grabbed him. That is enough to get you shot - as it would in many places around the world.

As my friend explains it. He was the commander on the scene with his attention pulled in a million directions. He just happened to see this happen very quickly and even though, as he tells it, it seemed like a movie frozen in time, he acted as quickly as he could to give the order to put their guns down and stop. Had he not been looking in the right place, at the right time, this Palestinian man would have been dead. And the soldiers would not have been malicious or wrong. They would have been defending their comrade, and following proper orders.

In this situation, my friend, was not a monster. In fact he was the exact opposite. He was a hero. His fellow soldiers were not monsters, they were doing their job. But the situation itself could have just as easily have had this man shot - and another reason would be created to hate Israelis.

And the final gem of the story of course is not that anyone realized my friend was a hero and prevented a death. He was just one of the bastard Israeli soldiers that not only make life miserable for Palestinians but also have the nerve to hold them at gunpoint.

Be careful what you read. Be critical of what you hear. Take every side into consideration before laying blame.

Addendum to Iraqi Victory and Global Warming: Afghanistan and the North Pole

- -
Can't believe I didn't include this in the previous post about the "proclaimed" victory in Iraq.

I wonder if Jeff caught this on the front page of the globe today?

Afghan plan adds 4,000 US troops
http://www.boston.com/news/nation/washington/articles/2009/03/27/afghan_plan_adds_4000_us_troops/

So when I say that Jeff Jacoby focuses on smaller details rather then the larger picture when it comes to either climate change or "victory" in Iraq, this is another good example.

Did Jeff conveniently forget about how bad Mr. Bush screwed up Afghanistan. Aside from what people are reading in the papers these days, history wonks know that even back in 2001, we had a real plan for defeating the Taliban and keeping them out of power. Instead, the "Generals on the ground" (as the conservatives like to say) and the CIA operatives on the ground were NOT listened to and the Pentagon shifted gears. They stopped pursuing Bin Laden, they shifted troops to Iraq (where there were more buildings and things to blow up - I kid you not) and lo and behold, Afghanistan has been slipping away ever since. But Bush couldn't do anything about it because that would have meant admitting things weren't going so well and hadn't for a while. Now it is up to Obama to try to clean it up, and frankly, I don't know if he can. The Taliban has become so entrenched now anything short of a detente may be impossible.

Sounds like Victory in Asia to me Jeff.

Oh, by the way, anyone read about the political conflicts in the North Pole? The Russians, Canadians, and the US are chomping at the bit for drilling rights to all the ocean that is opening up - DUE TO THE MELTING OF THE ICE AND GLOBAL WARMING.

But you're right Jeff. Lets shout about how last years average temperature went down a bit instead of up. (actually I'm sure his next column will be about the benefits of global warming given all the new oil we'll be getting as a result)

Iraqi "victory" defined ...

-
This is not pick on Jeff Jacoby week. He just writes about things I care about and his arguments, left unchallenged, could be very misleading.

Jeff's opinion on Iraq is very similar to his views on Global Warming (see blog post below). He looks only at the smallest of details and yet makes sweeping proclamations.

Bush's 'folly' is ending in victory (March 25)
http://www.boston.com/bostonglobe/editorial_opinion/oped/articles/2009/03/25/bushs_folly_is_ending_in_victory/

Besides, Jeff wrote almost this same article before, so I had to respond. Previously, maybe two years ago, he wrote about how good things were going in Iraq - it was just that no one wanted to cover it. My arguments then were:

1) How do you define "good" Jeff? If you mean better than the absolutely horrific and mindblowingly F-d up it was yesterday, then maybe you have a point. But if you are looking for anyone else's definition of good - Iraq is not the place.

2) And WHERE do you define "good" Jeff? If you mean within the highly fortified Green zone that is such a small portion of the WHOLE COUNTRY of Iraq than I guess you may have something. But if you are going to continue to say Iraq instead of a neighborhood in Baghdad, then I think you need to re-write your column.

There is no question that today, maybe, there are more signs of calm and normalcy in Iraq. But if you have to completely F up a country just so that when it inevitably calms down a bit you can claim SUCCESS - then I think we can still say the strategy was a bit flawed.

By writing at this time, it is also convenient that:

1) People don't know how bad it was - and that
2) People really don't know how bad it still is.

Yes terrorist bombings are less frequent - but LESS FREQUENT is not SUCCESS nor is it a victory of the Bush policy.

And if I hear about "The Surge" one more time I think I am going to puke. The surge did better stabilize one small part of Iraq. Yet, the rest of the country is still controlled by insurgents and don't you think they are there now, waiting for US withdrawal, rather than mixing it up with an increased US presence in Baghdad primarily.

Please do not take that last sentence as a critique of withdrawal. We need to withdraw and should have long ago. My point is that "The Surge" didn't solve anything. "The Surge" was not a strategy, it was an action - for which there was a re-action.

The real problem is that maybe - just maybe - there was a better way to get to where we are now or - god forbid - a better place than we are in right now. I wouldn't call the place we are in - after all the US and Iraqi deaths - a superior place to where we could have been under a leader other than Bush. That is why I can't really stand by while Jeff proclaims victory over the needlessly dead bodies of Iraqi civilians and US soldiers.

Keep an eye out in the papers. We have been desenstized to it, but the attacks continue. The deaths continue. And much like the climate, the numbers will go up and they will go down, but they won't go away. That Jeff, is victory.

Sifting Through Allegations About Israeli Abuse - It Isn't Easy

-
Ok, this is going to be tough for some of you to read. Not everyone will agree - clearly - or like who I have sourced - but you MUST open your eyes FULLY.

In the ongoing ping pong game that is the Human Rights community condemning Israel and Israel defending its actions - they don't make it easy. And there-in lies the rub. Because it is not easy to see where the "truth" lies, it is SO EASY to believe something that is less than the truth. This holds for most things in political life in America. But on this issue the ramifications are nothing less than the discrediting of the religious soul of some and the continuation of a cycle of horrific violence for others.

To further explain, the more "less than truths" are spread about Israel, the more the "pro-Israel" community needs to defend it. The "less than truths" are wrong, but it prevents those who support Israel from moving on to the better questions about the decisions of the Israeli government and people - which CAN be questioned. But they should only be questioned with the truth and not the "less than truths." The issue is not for example about the use of Phosphorous, or the tactics of the incursion, but whether the incursion gets us closer to a two state solution. The incursion can clearly be understood and justified - but it should not be vilified. No one is a demon here. Short sighted maybe, but not the devil some would claim.

In the recent accusations about the use of Phosphorous in the Gaza War, we have a perfect example of this ongoing game. And even in my previous sentence I have played into the game for a brief moment. The issue - if you look closely at the Human Rights reports and the Israeli Government reports - is about the INDISCRIMINATE use of Phosphorous. For you see, if you just read the articles as they come out in a vacuum, you would think that no one but Hannibal Lechter and Israel uses Phosphorous in shells to create smokescreens for troops. You, however, would be wrong. The use of Phosphorous is common and legal and used by most Western countries in combat. Everyone knows this but those who are biased against Israel don't care. They like that they have succeed in adding this phrase to dinner conversations all over the world. "And what about Israel and this Phosphorous .... see what I mean about them." Unfortunately that is a meaningless phrase. It's like the Elian Gonzalez photo which had a machine gun seemingly pointed at him. It wasn't. But no one calmed down to say "well of course a soldier would have a gun." The real question was - did he really need a gun going in to that home. The answer may have been "maybe if they thought the family might be armed" but no one asked.

This situation is very similar. Throughout the debate over Gaza and everything else in the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, Israel is held to a different standard than EVERY OTHER COUNTRY in the world. No one knows this because when the reports come out they never qualify their comments. For example, the latest report might have stated - "Phosphorous in shells creates the smokescreens that most Western armies use to give themselves cover from snipers. Our issue here is that it was used so close to a civilian population - and yes, yes we know that Hamas soldiers were stationed among the population, kept civilians around them specifically so we could make our report like this, and did station themselves in schools and the UN centers - but all that doesn't matter."

But it does matter. It is the other side of the coin. It is the reason why Israel, who feels they must do something to respond with strength and testosterone, is always between a rock and a hard place.

But this "less than truth" only serve to keep Israel and her supporters aware that there are those out there looking to discredit their actions, no matter what they do, or how careful they are. It doesn't matter how many text messages Israel sends, or leaflets they drop, or phone calls they make to this or that Gaza residence to evacuate (yes they did that). These reports, these "red herrings" will be used to stir up hatred and decrease support for Israel in the US.

What matters is that Israel sees no other way to vent their frustrations over Gilad Shalit or their inability to secure southern Israel from the Hamas terrorists in Gaza. Do people really wonder why Netanyahu has no desire to curl up to the dove and proclaim a Palestinian state in the West Bank just now? I am not saying he shouldn't, I am just asking people to understand why he is reluctant to say it. He is looking for something on the other side to, in his mind, warrant that proclamation. According to some, the fact that the Palestinians deserve it is enough. For Israelis who are frustrated, and angry, and are told to proclaim a state for people whose leaders want to destroy Israel (something Netanyahu is not saying about Palestinians) "deserving it" just isn't enough.

I say this also because it is the anniversary of the Camp David peace accords between Egypt and Israel. I know this is paraded out too often, but it doesn't make it any less true. Egypt possibly deserved to have the Sinai back. But Sadat didn't leave it at that. He knew that you can't wish death upon someone and then expect them to just warm up to you. I agree that Israeli leaders need to be pushed harder to making smarter decisions that will lead to trust instead of fear. Rabin got that, but he was exceptional. Most leaders are not, and that is who we have right now. Unexceptional leaders - on both sides. In this case it is up to us to try to moderate each side so that each side can at least tolerate the other.

But until that happens look closely at the accusations you see. Read everything you can. If I am right that Hamas did station militants in all the places Israel used Smoke (phosphorous) shells, something all western armies use in similar situations, would you think differently of the Human Rights reports? If Israel really did make announcements, drop leaflets, make phone calls, and send text messages for civilians to leave the areas, would you think differently about their actions?

And finally, to address this singular account that seems to be everywhere - the account where a building was cleared and a misunderstanding caused a family to turn right when they should have turned left. They were shot under a shoot to kill order, again a practice common to western armies, a practice used commonly in war when you cannot be sure whether a civilian is a hostile. This is a reason for the conflict to stop - not to blame any one side. These are the kinds of misunderstandings that should cause BOTH sides to convince their respective leaders to cease and desist. One side cannot do that alone.

Look more closely at the story. Civilians were being cleared BY THE ISRAELI MILITARY. Did everyone just miss that fact. Ask why civilians were still there after all the attempts to clear the area? Why were they even there in the first place? Unfortunately, they were there because it is common for civilians to live among military targets. It is a win win. If the Israeli's don't strike, militants have protected their arms. If the Israeli's do strike, and civilians are harmed, the militants win the PR war.

Again, you can also ask why Israel was in Gaza but I will repeat - it may not have been the BEST decision to attack in Gaza, but it was a legitimate and understandable one. This is my point. Everyone is acting understandably here. I will just be damned if I am going to sit by while Israel is repeatedly the only party blamed for acting in a way people do not think is "understandable."

Please Read:
Israeli Government Statement on use of Phosphorous/Smoke Shells
http://www.mfa.gov.il/MFA/Government/Communiques/2009/IDF_response_Human_Rights_Watch_Report_25-Mar-2009.htm
Boston Globe Article on Human Rights Report
http://www.boston.com/news/world/middleeast/articles/2009/03/26/rights_group_critical_of_israeli_shelling/
Boston Globe Article on Netanyahu, Peace, and a Palestinian State
http://www.boston.com/news/world/middleeast/articles/2009/03/26/netanyahu_vows_to_seek_peace_with_palestinians/

Israel Policy Forum - On Home Demolitions and Chas Freeman ... When they get it right and when they get it wrong

-
Recent posts by the Israel Policy Forum are great examples of how when they are right, they are a valuable source of information, but how when they are wrong, they can really detract from productive discourse.

In a recent post about home demolitions, Stopping Home Demolitions, Securing Jerusalem's Future (Sadie Goldman, March 25, 2009), they show how they can tell stories that people need to hear. While I wish they had also spoken about how East Jerusalem has never been considered part of the "territories" and as such needs to be discussed in a different context, they still tell an important story about how more conservative politicos in Israel are still caught in the past and making dialogue between the two sides more difficult than they need to be.

And the fact that I am including this link and commending the story is a clear indication of my desire to be balanced on this issue. Many in the "pro-Israel" community would disagree with highlighting this problem. But it is a problem, it is all "legal" but it may not all be the best thing for working toward our final two-state solution.
https://israelpolicyforum.ngphost.com/analysis/stopping-home-demolitions-securing-jerusalems-future


But Michael Rosenberg's campaign against those who did not support Chas Freeman's appointment to the NIC chair is more of a problem. No commending this one.
http://israelpolicyforum.ngphost.com/blog/firestorm-freeman-withdrawal-explodes-msm

In this and previous posts, Rosenberg goes too far and plays right into the hands of those who like to believe the conspiracy of the "Jewish Lobby" exists. The age old myth that a cabal of Jews plots to control world governments, banks, and media. Now Rosenberg - along with Stephen Walt and John Mearsheimer - will say that is not what they mean. They will say that their "Israel Lobby" is not the same as the "Jewish Lobby" of days gone past. What I once asked Walt in person was this ... "Because you know how others will process your work, and because you do not specify that so many Jewish organizational lobby groups do NOT agree with those you attack, aren't you leaving them open to connect the dots - especially since you go on to say that this "lobby" operates to the detriment of America, just like the old myth?"

His answer to me was simply that he did not see it like that and that he took that responsibility seriously - and specifically stated in the front of the book that he was not anti-Semitic. Well for both Rosenberg and the Walt/Mearsheimer team, I say to you again, you cannot assume that people will not believe what they have known all their lives if you are not more careful.

I have read the works of all three and in both tone and content, they are NOT careful enough and do not qualify their work. Rosenberg most recently rails with language that would make any novice or expert believe that there is a clandestine group who pressures Washington politicos for Israel - right or wrong. Well, Mr. Rosenberg, we know that organization is AIPAC and they make no bones about that. As for everyone else, well maybe they have other reasons for condemning Chas Freeman and maybe you have not represented them well and in so doing, allow others less informed to be convinced - yet one more time - of those dastardly Jews who are controlling the US government and STIFLING debate once again.

Well Mr. Rosenberg, there was plenty of debate. And if you actually look at statements made by Mr. Freeman, he wasn't just critical of Israel policies, but he didn't even seem to be at all sympathetic to them on the issue or balanced in his statements. And if he can't be diplomatic before he takes office, what is he going to be like once he gets in there. The bottom line is there was just cause for many who care about Israel to dislike the appointment - even with all of his qualifications. They simply felt someone more even handed could be found. And I know they would accept criticism of Israeli policies, but just like with every other issue in this country, you want someone who is closer to what you believe. Criticism of Israel was not in this case - and is rarely ever the issue. It is about how far that criticism goes. But to have people like you continually spout that ANY criticism of Israel is what gets you in trouble, perpetuates the very myths and stereotypes that keep our dialogue on this issue going backward instead of forward.

Jeff Jacoby - How Can He Be So Right AND So Wrong?

-
I have rarely read a columnist who I find to be so right on so many issues but so dead wrong on so many others.

One of Jeff's latest columns, History's oldest hatred, March 11, is a commendable piece on anti-Semitism. It is quite good and I recommend it. He uses the recent Holiday of Purim to explain how, although the name anti-Semitism itself is a bit problematic, hatred against Jews, simply for being Jews, is a Historical reality that will not go away. What he also focuses on is that the "hatred for simply being a Jewish person" is rarely connected to what these people do, but is more a part of perceptions, or passed down negative feelings that people have toward Jewish people - in their psyche.
http://www.boston.com/bostonglobe/editorial_opinion/oped/articles/2009/03/11/historys_oldest_hatred/

But two previous columns infuriated me.
Where's Global Warming? (March 11) and
This is not a nation of cowards, Mr. Holder (February 25)
http://www.boston.com/bostonglobe/editorial_opinion/oped/articles/2009/03/08/wheres_global_warming/
http://www.boston.com/bostonglobe/editorial_opinion/oped/articles/2009/02/25/this_is_not_a_nation_of_cowards_mr_holder/

In his piece, Where's global warming? Jeff reminded me of a segment Rush Limbaugh once did on his television show years ago. Rush sent a guy down to the street in the dead of Winter with a microphone to interview people. As they walked by on this frigid day, the interviewer would ask provocatively, "So what do YOU think of Global Warming?" You can imagine the responses, but thy ranged from "Global Warming My A$$!" to "I have your global warming right here!"

Now on one level I get what Jeff is saying. If there happens to be a year when the trend goes in the opposite direction, maybe we should know about it , just as we hear when a year goes in the other direction. But here is where I go beyond disagreement and to the area of calling a penalty on him for dangerous commentary. His column is akin to saying, "Sure go ahead, smoke, my grandfather smokes and he is 95!" Jeff is totally wrong because he is thinking of ONE year the same way that the scientists think of DECADES AND CENTURIES. The trend in those areas - the only ones that really matter - DO deserve the heightened focus to get us to change our energy habits. ONE year of a colder winter is not worthy of any excitement because those single years also exist all over the centuries and decades that show the trends OVERWHELMINGLY going in the other direction.

His comments also reminded of me of something that happened just about a year ago. As a fitness person, when similar idiotic statements are made in that world, I get just as upset. When a study showed that the amount of Water people "should" be drinking a day was not quite as high as once thought, the news ran with it as if we had all been duped and that you really didn't need to drink water at all. Not that the average person had really even gotten the message that drinking more water can be SO much better for you than if you didn't, but this was press pushing people in the opposite direction. This was the opposite direction for where people in the fitness industry had been trying to drag them, kicking and screaming for years. That is what you are doing Jeff with your climate column Jeff. Yes I guess we should know about a single year of a colder winter, but when the decade trend is in that direction, then write a column criticizing the people who are trying to save our planet.

As for Jeff's other column, This is not a nation of cowards, Mr. Holder, I couldn't disagree with Jeff more. The reasons are actually very similar to the reasons I give above. While I don't know if we are a "nation of cowards" there are MANY issues we do not face as honestly and productively as we should. Race, and things like anti-Semitism, are just two of them. As a former teacher, I can tell you without question that we are still hiding from these issues and it carries over into the schools, into the playing fields, into our daily lives.

The one thing I blame the most for this cowardice is the fear of confrontation - on anything serious in this country. We've got millions of people talking to each other every day about Fantasy Football - but no politics please. I hear things all the time like "Yes my kid was taunted at the game, but I have to see these people around town, just let it go."

Jeff, I get that you think Mr. Holder went over board. But its about time someone did - about ANYTHING really important.

What's in the water in Southern Mass?

-
Once again, there seems to be an angry response about Israel related issues in South Coast Today. Now let me first say that I understand these angry voices do not represent the majority of great people in Southern Mass. However, the regularity with which they come out in the paper begs two questions:

1) Why does the paper print these minority views with regularity - when they clearly are not representative and when they are clearly damaging the community discourse?

2) Why is that the people who are making the noise are so convinced that Israel is the devil and that any support for her or defense of her actions is immoral?

The latest response is a great case in point for much of what is wrong with this discourse. In the Op Ed "Today's issue is Palestinian rights, not past suffering" Thomas Shire ironically ends up talking very much about past suffering and really doesn't deal very much at all with Palestinian rights. http://www.southcoasttoday.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20090323/OPINION/903230301

He also takes a few common jabs that are two of my litmus tests for someone who is just not credible. To be fair, these two issues are topics that NEED to be discussed in Jewish, Muslim, and Christian circles. They need to be discussed because so many people don't even know how ridiculous they are.

1) The idea that any time a Jewish person brings up the Holocaust when someone else thinks the issue is the Palestinians, they are one more of "those Jews who talk too much about the Holocaust." As I pointed out in a previous post, the current issue IS so often about the Holocaust because so many comments and critiques of Israel have DEEP roots in the myths and stereotypes about Jewish people. More important is that the same Jewish person who yearns for a Palestinian state can be absolutely right about a criticism of Israel taps into that long history of anti-Jewish sentiment. The problem is that people who are not sensitized to that long History don't even see the connection. The other problem is that many Jews (and non Jews) are.

2) The idea that one can never use the word anti-Semitism because the literal meaning of Semite is someone from the Middle East is absurd and I am embarrassed for Mr. Shire for having joined those who would use the argument. It is UNIVERSALLY accepted that anti-Semitsm is the term used for anti-Jewish sentiment. Any argument otherwise is a red herring that simply seeks to discredit anyone who ever claims anything is anti-Semitic. Now except for the fact that anti-Semitism does exist (anti-Jewish sentiments) I would never use the word again. Its just got too much baggage it just rarely is a positive for the person using it. But much like the word Liberal, and Zionism, it is a shame that the agenda of others has so corrupted a genuine and useful word.

But getting back the original point - the title that is, the real absurdity of this article is that Mr. Shire actually thinks he can compare the isolated acts of the JDL with the historical threat that is Arab Muslim extremism. In fact that was the main thrust of my last post - that you simply cannot compare the genuine fear created by the extremists of today's Arab world and frankly anything else in History. But again, I would prefer not to compare anger and hostilities of the past which is exactly what Mr. Shire did. But the JDL? Is that the best you could come up with?

The Project: Looking Forward for a Two State Solution

-

Two speakers taking a new approach to the

Israeli-Palestinian conflict

As an alternative to having inflammatory charges leveled against Israel and common misperceptions spread about the Palestinian people, this presentation gives context for how two peoples find themselves locked in a tragedy of epic proportions. The overarching theme from both speakers is that real progress can only take place if dialogue can move beyond the anger and distrust of the past. The goal is to provide a more productive framework for discussion to help both Israelis and Palestinians move closer to their long sought after two sate solution.

Ihab Khatib, a Palestinian from Jerusalem, is currently pursuing a Masters degree in Public Administration from the Kennedy School of Government at Harvard University. He holds a Masters degree in Management from the Sorbonne University in Paris and a Bachelors Degree from the University of Arkansas, USA. From 1997 to 2005, Ihab served in various positions at the World Bank NGO project, UNICEF and UNRWA in Jerusalem and worked with a Division of USAID on projects with the Palestinian President’s Office. In 2006, he joined the Palestine Investment Fund and has been a leading member in establishing Investment Projects in the West Bank and Gaza. Ihab was also a leading member of the task force assigned by the Palestinian Prime Minister’s Office in launching the first Palestinian Investment Conference that took place in Bethlehem in June 2008.

David Cohen, has been working as an educator and Israel programs director for over fifteen years. David is the former Associate Regional Director for the Anti-Defamation League’s, New England Region where he directed their Israel education programs and provided Middle East policy analysis. For three years, David directed an Israel based social justice program that brought Jewish and Arab communities together to build bridges of understanding through cultural exchange and community service. David holds a BA from Brandeis University and a Masters Degree from Boston University where he focused on International Political History. David also studied European Politics and International Law at King’s College in London in 1990. David currently sits on the Combined Jewish Philanthropies Boston-Haifa Living Bridges Committee and the Jewish Community Relations Council Israel Action Committee.

Getting into the fray ... The American Disonnect in the Israeli-Palestinian Crisis

-
http://www.southcoasttoday.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20090324/OPINION/903240315

For those of you who may not be aware, one of my interests has always been the way in which the Israeli-Palestinian conflict is debated in this country and abroad. Some of you also know that I previously directed a program that sought to engage both Jewish Israelis and Arab youth to better understand each other and how their views either perpetuate the conflict or help bring the two side closer to some kind of negotiated two-state solution.

Part of my work involves helping certain communities who are not used to venturing into this fray. The help can take the form of media relations, strategic planning, community organizing or educational programming. What I think people really do need to realize however, especially those not as familiar with the topic, is that with the recent war in Gaza, perceptions and feelings about Israel and Jews that are generally held under the surface in our society, rear their ugly heads in the very public pages of our newspapers, on our radio stations, in our politics and eventually in our workplaces and schools. So while what's happening over there is not pretty, it is not one sides fault. But what is happening in our communities is not pretty either and no one is really addressing it in a rational way. People are being pushed to polarized sides and frankly - the newspapers love it.

I was recently doing some work in Southern Mass. and a few articles called me out. At the top is my recent response to some of them. Enjoy!