by Isi Liebler from the blog Word from Jerusalem
Of late, the western media has provided inordinate prominence to Jewish fringe organizations like J Street and its European clone, JCall, which define themselves as "liberal" and "pro-peace", but concentrate on castigating the Israeli government and undermining mainstream Diaspora pro-Israel Jewish organizations.
These bodies are primarily controlled by anti-Israeli activists, but also include many well-meaning but confused liberal fellow travelers. They also attract uninformed Jews and members of the anti-Zionist chic influenced by constant negative media depictions of Israel.
Their core message is that the Jewish establishment is alienating the bulk of the Jewish street, by blindly supporting the policies of an extremist right wing Israeli government and indulging in "McCarthyite" tactics to excommunicate anyone who dares to criticize Israeli policies.
These unrepresentative bodies receive widespread favorable exposure by a media which relishes quoting Jews beating up on Israel. Whenever Jewish writers or academics condemn Israel or castigate their own community, they are portrayed as heroic voices of conscience resisting a harsh and bigoted Jewish leadership. One only has to compare the enormous media coverage provided to the European J Call petition criticizing Israel with a counter petition by Italian MP Fiamma Nirenstein which contained many more signatories and was effectively ignored.
This was also exemplified in the US by the extraordinary media coverage extended to former New Republic editor Peter Beinart who wrote a lengthy essay titled "The Failure of the American Jewish Establishment" in the New York Review of Books, a periodical renowned for its longstanding hostility to successive Israeli governments. Beinart selectively chose extremist remarks from Israeli hawks, falsely alleged that Prime Minister Netanyahu repudiated the Oslo Accords, quoted the "renowned" Hebrew University professor Ze'ev Sternhell - a bitter post-Zionist - alleging that Israel has "fascist characteristics" and accusing the Israeli government and Jewish leadership of alienating the younger generation of liberal Jews.
There is an uncanny parallel between these "pro-peace" groups and the bogus peace councils sponsored by the Soviet Union during the Cold War, which also claimed to be the true custodians of peace and succeeded in duping many "fellow travelers" into becoming accessories in promoting the global objectives of the Evil Empire.
Today these pseudo "pro-peace" bodies seek to undermine the only liberal democratic state in the region and divert attention from the reprehensible behavior and denial of human rights practiced by Israel's enemies.
In the battle of the war of ideas in which electronic media images of the suffering of the underdog blur moral considerations of right and wrong and disregard the source of conflicts, these groups distort the case for Israel and undermine the Zionist narrative.
They call on the global community to pressure the government of Israel to make further unilateral concessions. They insist that the core of the problem rests with the settlements, an issue which does divide Israelis. However, the suggestion that peace and goodwill would be achieved if Israel unilaterally withdrew from territories across the green line is absolute nonsense and detracts from the real obstacle to peace which is the absence of a genuine Palestinian peace partner and the ongoing Arab obsession with bringing an end to Jewish sovereignty.
The "pro peace" groups ignore the fact that Netanyahu has steered the government to a genuine centrist position and achieved a broad consensus that aside from the major settlement blocs, Israelis would compromise on territories in return for genuine peace and security. That sentiment prevails despite the awareness that until now territorial concessions have only yielded further terror and aggression.
The repeated wails by the "pro peace" groups that they encounter McCarthyism and are denied the opportunity to express themselves are specious and particularly hypocritical coming from those who unhesitatingly slander and seek to intimidate their critics. There has always been vigorous dissent amongst Jews on all political issues. But it was during the formative years of the state when the social-democratic Mapai ruled the roost, that a consensus prevailed that Diaspora Jews, who do not face the life and death consequences arising from decisions relating to Israel's defense, were morally obliged to allow the people of Israel through their democratically elected government to determine such issues.
Today, that concept is regarded with contempt by the "pro peace" elements, who claim to have a better appreciation of what is in the best interests of Israel than Israelis themselves. Indeed, these self appointed formulators of Israel policy articulate views that are sometimes more extreme than those of Meretz, the most far Left political party in the Knesset, holding only 3 out of 120 Knesset seats.
Of late, it is increasingly alleged that the new generation of younger Jews is turning against Israel. This is highly misleading. Obviously the passion for Israel amongst Jews of this generation is less intense than those who witnessed the Shoa and the struggle to create a Jewish State. However, it was always only 25 to 30% who comprised the activist element within Jewish communities and were at the forefront of Zionist and pro-Israel activity. Assimilated or less involved Jews were understandably less involved and somewhat apathetic, only becoming galvanized during periods of acute crisis such as the Six-Day War.
With some modifications, this remains true today. Jewish youngsters actively involved in Jewish life remain overwhelmingly supportive of Israel. Those ignorant or indifferent to Judaism are more susceptible to the impact of hostile influences surrounding them, especially on the university campuses, and many recoil from involvement with Israel.
However, the dramatic response by the activist American Jewish community to the negative attitude displayed against Israel by the Obama administration was astonishing. Despite the fact that 78% of them supported him, at a grassroots level many committed Democratic Jewish supporters have displayed anger and frustration against the administration for having reneged on Obama's electoral undertakings concerning Israel.
However, one should not underestimate the potential for damage that small numbers of determined Jewish anti-Israel activists can inflict. The message that they seek to impart is that Israel is controlled by extremist right-wing bigots and that it is incompatible for liberals to support such a regime. They compound this by directly or implicitly giving credence to canards accusing supporters of Israel of dual loyalties as well as allegations that Israel is endangering American lives. In fact, there are already disturbing signals that today the traditional bipartisan support towards Israel is eroding and that Democrats are far less committed to Israel than the Republicans.
Needless to say, this requires urgent attention. Both the government and the Jewish Agency should map out a strategy which takes account of the enormous damage these groups can inflict if they are not marginalized. One of the most effective means would be for the government to sponsor a global solidarity meeting with Jewish leaders, intellectuals and key activists to demonstrate that the vast majority of committed Jews remain fully dedicated to supporting the Jewish State. Israel must be able to rely on the ongoing support of world Jewry.
ileibler@netvision.net.il
This column was originally published as a blog post in the Jerusalem Post
Click on the links here to see earlier posts from this week 'More on Tel Aviv University and radical university professors' and 'The Guardian and anti-Israel lies.'
Showing posts with label campus. Show all posts
Showing posts with label campus. Show all posts
Friday, May 28, 2010
Sunday, May 9, 2010
YVES ENGLER AT U OF M EXPLAINS HIS SUSPENSION FROM CONCORDIA UNIVERSITY AFTER NETANYAHU’S ABORTED SPEECH IN 2002
by Rhonda Spivak
The Winnipeg Jewish Review asks Engler at U of M to explain his suspension on the record
Special Report and Comment By Rhonda Spivak
Yves Engler, who has written an anti-Israel book entitled “Canada and Israel: Building Apartheid” spoke in Winnipeg on April 7 at University College at the University of Manitoba, to an audience of about 20 students/supporters.
His talk at the U of M was sponsored by Canada-Palestine Support Network, Independent Jewish Voices, U of M’s Labour Studies Program, and Canadian Dimension Magazine. His talk followed his talk the night before at the Rudolf Rocker Cultural Centre on 91 Albert Street.
Alan Yusim, Director of B’nai Brith, Mid-West Region, was present to hear Engler’s talk at the U of M.
Those who introduced Engler and put on the program made no mention of the fact that Engler had been suspended from Concordia University, and Engler himself didn’t mention this either.
Engler served as Vice President of the Concordia Student Union prior to being removed from office. A student tribunal found Engler guilty of "vexatious conduct" in the aftermath of a riot on Sept. 9, 2002, when Israeli politician Benjamin Netanyahu's speech was aborted by demonstrators. Engler later tried to overturn his suspension; however, he was denied by a student hearing panel and Board of Governors. The university's decision was upheld by a Quebec tribunal.
The day that Netanyahu was supposed to speak, some protesters harassed the predominantly Jewish audience that had arrived for the speech, and there were reports of Holocaust survivors being assaulted. Journalist Lysiane Gagnon accused the university's pro-Palestinian students union of "refusing to blame those who broke windows, threw chairs around, spat at and shoved the Jewish students who wanted to hear Mr. Netanyahu. (Lysiane Gagnon, "Here's to you, Mr. Robinson", Globe and Mail, 2 December 2002, A19).
An article in Concordia’s Thursday Report on March 3, 2005 (http://ctr.concordia.ca/2004-05/mar_03/23/ ) states:
“A student tribunal found Engler guilty of assault and vandalism in the aftermath of a riot on Sept. 9, 2002, when Israeli politician Benjamin Netanyahu’s speech was aborted by demonstrators. Engler was fined $500 and expelled for one term.
“However, when he defied the ban by appearing on campus, President Frederick Lowy added another term to his suspension. Once again he breached the sanction, this time committing vandalism. On Dec. 15, on the recommendation of then Dean of Students Charles Bertrand, Lowy extended the suspension to five years.
“Engler took this decision to an appeals panel, which, like the student hearings panel, is part of the university’s Code of Rights and Responsibilities. His appeal was denied. He asked the Board of Governors to exercise their discretionary powers on his behalf, and this, too, was denied.
“In her judgment, rendered Feb. 1, Justice Sylviane Borenstein of Quebec Superior Court said the decisions taken by the university conformed to its own regulations and followed the rules of natural justice.”
Engler’s talk at U of M was being taped by two different parties, including University of Winnipeg radio.
I asked several times during question period for Engler to talk about his suspension, something which he was reluctant to do. At first he offered to talk to me afterward (where he would not be recorded). Just before the event ended, after persistent questioning he finally did answer the question.
As readers review Engler’s “side of the story” below, note how in his answer he makes great effort to downplay any responsibility the protesters had for breaking windows and vandalizing. Note also how Engler essentially tries to turn the story on its head by saying that Arab protesters broke windows in a good faith attempt to help a left-wing Jewish victim of police brutality. Other reports essentially say the opposite- that police officers were attacked, and that windows were broken by Arab protesters to cause a riot and attempt to prevent Netanyahu from speaking. It’s also worth noting that in the end, Engler tells us that when the University suspended him for five years, it was the maximum punishment allowed.
Here is Yves Engler’s side of the story ( as recorded in his talk at the U of M on April 7)
SPIVAK:
ENGLER: Benjamin Netanyahu on Sept 9 2002...was planned to speak at Concordia. Most people in this room are probably aware that he didn’t end up speaking, and there was a big protest outside...because the police were beating up a Jewish student who was protesting Netanyahu’s speaking engagement, a Jewish student who was a member of the Concordia Student Union, because of that some Arab students outside busted a window to come to the defense of the Jewish student.. which is not part of the large narrative that we hear about the anti-Semitism of the day... but the windows that have been cited in the Globe and Mail as the day of broken glass.. the windows were busted because some Arab students outside were disgusted by what the police were doing to a Jewish student inside...Part of the story that I’m sure you’re not familiar with... What happened with Netanyahu was that Netanyahu and the Montreal police cancelled the talk because the Concordia security messed up...
The Montreal police who were not initially inside the building once the window was broken. They had people coming down from the mezzanine...and they had people coming from outside after the window was busted...they freaked out... released pepper spray, some say tear gas within the university. It got caught in the university’s ventiliation system so people on the tenth or twelfth floor of the university had to come out of their classes... cuz they couldn’t breathe....that’s what shut down Netanyahu’s talk. That’s what happened
SPIVAK: But then why were you suspended?
ENGLER:...If you want to hear my personal element to it...Everyone agrees that I was not there, including the university administration, agrees that I was not on the mezzanine when the stuff went down per se...I was there earlier on....
I was kicked out of the university, because two months after the Netanyahu protest-I wasn’t suspended I was expelled from the university-two months after the Netanyahu protest, a student came forward and claimed...this was after I had been arrested for handing out leaflets for the Free Trade Area of the Americas,six weeks after the Netanyahu protest a student came forward and said I assaulted his girlfriend during the Netanyahu protest.. The girlfriend of course didn’t exist of course and they decided not to bring this to the police of course where they would have had to provide some evidence...There was a student tribunal... and.. they tried to throw me out of university for putting up stickers about the Free trade Area of the Americas and handing out leaflets about the Free Trade Area of the Americas and for two things related to the Netanyahu protest.
Spivak: What were those two things?
Engler: One [was for the] vexatious conduct...which was the alleged assault... and the other one was something do with being on the mezzanine at some point, a very sort of whatever.. The student tribunal found me guilty of two of the charges putting up stickers and the vexatious conduct...and I didn’t know what vexatious meant until I saw that. According to the dictionary it means pushing, harassing, assaulting I think is what vexatious means.
The student tribunal came out the next day and said they were pressured by the University administration to suspending me... What they wanted to bring on was some small number of community service hours... The University said I didn’t fulfill my suspension... They suspended me again, they said I didn’t fulfill my suspension. They suspended me a second time and said I didn’t fulfill it again and they expelled me for 5 years...by law they can’t suspend me for more than a five years suspension. That’s the story...
ENGLER’S AGENDA
When I asked Engler whether he advocated a two state solution or a one state solution, Engler said that “the idea of a Jewish state seems immoral to me”, although he then tried to soften this statement by saying that he also at times questions whether Canada should exist as it does, since, for example “Vancouver and Seattle” have a lot in common and could easily be part of one country.
Engler, who several months earlier had signed a call to support the international campaign for Boycott, Divestment and Sanctions against Israel, said “the easiest solution [to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict] is a two state [solution]toward a more longer term just solution.”
In my view, Engler’s comment is consistent with the well known “eliminate Israel in stages plan.” How many people seriously think that Israel will agree to a two-state solution, so that rather than this being a final end of the conflict, it is only the first stage toward a one state solution-- where Israel is flooded by the return of Palestinian refugees so that there is no Israel at all, but one large Palestinian state among twenty two other Arab states (where Jews have no right to national self-determination at all.)
In his talk Engler also criticized Canada’s role in building up the Palestinian police force under General Dayton, indicating that this was an attempt to created Palestinian disunity (in that the PA police force would crack down on Hamas).
In my view, it is quite a stretch to suggest that Canada is responsible for causing Palestinian disunity? (as if Palestinian unity would exist but for Canada’s intervention!!)
I asked Engler if he could list some other factors that cause Palestinian disunity (such as Hamas forces in 2007 throwing Fatah forces off of rooftops in Gaza), but he did not answer the question.
SMALL ATTENDANCE FOR ENGLER’S TALK
Before Engler’s talk I overheard Engler openly state that it was unfortunate nobody tried to ban him from speaking because he receives much more attention and more people coming out to hear him when a pro-Israel group tries to ban him. He noted that when he spoke at the Rudolf Rocker Cultural Centre the previous evening, there had only been about 20 people, and he would have had three or four times as many had someone tried to ban him.
Alan Yusim from B’nai Brith ought to be commended for coming to hear Engler. As distasteful as Engler’s views are to the vast majority of the Jewish community, it is important that we be aware of what is really happening on our campuses.
See the story here at Israel Behind the News
The Winnipeg Jewish Review asks Engler at U of M to explain his suspension on the record
Special Report and Comment By Rhonda Spivak
Yves Engler, who has written an anti-Israel book entitled “Canada and Israel: Building Apartheid” spoke in Winnipeg on April 7 at University College at the University of Manitoba, to an audience of about 20 students/supporters.
His talk at the U of M was sponsored by Canada-Palestine Support Network, Independent Jewish Voices, U of M’s Labour Studies Program, and Canadian Dimension Magazine. His talk followed his talk the night before at the Rudolf Rocker Cultural Centre on 91 Albert Street.
Alan Yusim, Director of B’nai Brith, Mid-West Region, was present to hear Engler’s talk at the U of M.
Those who introduced Engler and put on the program made no mention of the fact that Engler had been suspended from Concordia University, and Engler himself didn’t mention this either.
Engler served as Vice President of the Concordia Student Union prior to being removed from office. A student tribunal found Engler guilty of "vexatious conduct" in the aftermath of a riot on Sept. 9, 2002, when Israeli politician Benjamin Netanyahu's speech was aborted by demonstrators. Engler later tried to overturn his suspension; however, he was denied by a student hearing panel and Board of Governors. The university's decision was upheld by a Quebec tribunal.
The day that Netanyahu was supposed to speak, some protesters harassed the predominantly Jewish audience that had arrived for the speech, and there were reports of Holocaust survivors being assaulted. Journalist Lysiane Gagnon accused the university's pro-Palestinian students union of "refusing to blame those who broke windows, threw chairs around, spat at and shoved the Jewish students who wanted to hear Mr. Netanyahu. (Lysiane Gagnon, "Here's to you, Mr. Robinson", Globe and Mail, 2 December 2002, A19).
An article in Concordia’s Thursday Report on March 3, 2005 (http://ctr.concordia.ca/2004-05/mar_03/23/ ) states:
“A student tribunal found Engler guilty of assault and vandalism in the aftermath of a riot on Sept. 9, 2002, when Israeli politician Benjamin Netanyahu’s speech was aborted by demonstrators. Engler was fined $500 and expelled for one term.
“However, when he defied the ban by appearing on campus, President Frederick Lowy added another term to his suspension. Once again he breached the sanction, this time committing vandalism. On Dec. 15, on the recommendation of then Dean of Students Charles Bertrand, Lowy extended the suspension to five years.
“Engler took this decision to an appeals panel, which, like the student hearings panel, is part of the university’s Code of Rights and Responsibilities. His appeal was denied. He asked the Board of Governors to exercise their discretionary powers on his behalf, and this, too, was denied.
“In her judgment, rendered Feb. 1, Justice Sylviane Borenstein of Quebec Superior Court said the decisions taken by the university conformed to its own regulations and followed the rules of natural justice.”
Engler’s talk at U of M was being taped by two different parties, including University of Winnipeg radio.
I asked several times during question period for Engler to talk about his suspension, something which he was reluctant to do. At first he offered to talk to me afterward (where he would not be recorded). Just before the event ended, after persistent questioning he finally did answer the question.
As readers review Engler’s “side of the story” below, note how in his answer he makes great effort to downplay any responsibility the protesters had for breaking windows and vandalizing. Note also how Engler essentially tries to turn the story on its head by saying that Arab protesters broke windows in a good faith attempt to help a left-wing Jewish victim of police brutality. Other reports essentially say the opposite- that police officers were attacked, and that windows were broken by Arab protesters to cause a riot and attempt to prevent Netanyahu from speaking. It’s also worth noting that in the end, Engler tells us that when the University suspended him for five years, it was the maximum punishment allowed.
Here is Yves Engler’s side of the story ( as recorded in his talk at the U of M on April 7)
SPIVAK:
ENGLER: Benjamin Netanyahu on Sept 9 2002...was planned to speak at Concordia. Most people in this room are probably aware that he didn’t end up speaking, and there was a big protest outside...because the police were beating up a Jewish student who was protesting Netanyahu’s speaking engagement, a Jewish student who was a member of the Concordia Student Union, because of that some Arab students outside busted a window to come to the defense of the Jewish student.. which is not part of the large narrative that we hear about the anti-Semitism of the day... but the windows that have been cited in the Globe and Mail as the day of broken glass.. the windows were busted because some Arab students outside were disgusted by what the police were doing to a Jewish student inside...Part of the story that I’m sure you’re not familiar with... What happened with Netanyahu was that Netanyahu and the Montreal police cancelled the talk because the Concordia security messed up...
The Montreal police who were not initially inside the building once the window was broken. They had people coming down from the mezzanine...and they had people coming from outside after the window was busted...they freaked out... released pepper spray, some say tear gas within the university. It got caught in the university’s ventiliation system so people on the tenth or twelfth floor of the university had to come out of their classes... cuz they couldn’t breathe....that’s what shut down Netanyahu’s talk. That’s what happened
SPIVAK: But then why were you suspended?
ENGLER:...If you want to hear my personal element to it...Everyone agrees that I was not there, including the university administration, agrees that I was not on the mezzanine when the stuff went down per se...I was there earlier on....
I was kicked out of the university, because two months after the Netanyahu protest-I wasn’t suspended I was expelled from the university-two months after the Netanyahu protest, a student came forward and claimed...this was after I had been arrested for handing out leaflets for the Free Trade Area of the Americas,six weeks after the Netanyahu protest a student came forward and said I assaulted his girlfriend during the Netanyahu protest.. The girlfriend of course didn’t exist of course and they decided not to bring this to the police of course where they would have had to provide some evidence...There was a student tribunal... and.. they tried to throw me out of university for putting up stickers about the Free trade Area of the Americas and handing out leaflets about the Free Trade Area of the Americas and for two things related to the Netanyahu protest.
Spivak: What were those two things?
Engler: One [was for the] vexatious conduct...which was the alleged assault... and the other one was something do with being on the mezzanine at some point, a very sort of whatever.. The student tribunal found me guilty of two of the charges putting up stickers and the vexatious conduct...and I didn’t know what vexatious meant until I saw that. According to the dictionary it means pushing, harassing, assaulting I think is what vexatious means.
The student tribunal came out the next day and said they were pressured by the University administration to suspending me... What they wanted to bring on was some small number of community service hours... The University said I didn’t fulfill my suspension... They suspended me again, they said I didn’t fulfill my suspension. They suspended me a second time and said I didn’t fulfill it again and they expelled me for 5 years...by law they can’t suspend me for more than a five years suspension. That’s the story...
ENGLER’S AGENDA
When I asked Engler whether he advocated a two state solution or a one state solution, Engler said that “the idea of a Jewish state seems immoral to me”, although he then tried to soften this statement by saying that he also at times questions whether Canada should exist as it does, since, for example “Vancouver and Seattle” have a lot in common and could easily be part of one country.
Engler, who several months earlier had signed a call to support the international campaign for Boycott, Divestment and Sanctions against Israel, said “the easiest solution [to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict] is a two state [solution]toward a more longer term just solution.”
In my view, Engler’s comment is consistent with the well known “eliminate Israel in stages plan.” How many people seriously think that Israel will agree to a two-state solution, so that rather than this being a final end of the conflict, it is only the first stage toward a one state solution-- where Israel is flooded by the return of Palestinian refugees so that there is no Israel at all, but one large Palestinian state among twenty two other Arab states (where Jews have no right to national self-determination at all.)
In his talk Engler also criticized Canada’s role in building up the Palestinian police force under General Dayton, indicating that this was an attempt to created Palestinian disunity (in that the PA police force would crack down on Hamas).
In my view, it is quite a stretch to suggest that Canada is responsible for causing Palestinian disunity? (as if Palestinian unity would exist but for Canada’s intervention!!)
I asked Engler if he could list some other factors that cause Palestinian disunity (such as Hamas forces in 2007 throwing Fatah forces off of rooftops in Gaza), but he did not answer the question.
SMALL ATTENDANCE FOR ENGLER’S TALK
Before Engler’s talk I overheard Engler openly state that it was unfortunate nobody tried to ban him from speaking because he receives much more attention and more people coming out to hear him when a pro-Israel group tries to ban him. He noted that when he spoke at the Rudolf Rocker Cultural Centre the previous evening, there had only been about 20 people, and he would have had three or four times as many had someone tried to ban him.
Alan Yusim from B’nai Brith ought to be commended for coming to hear Engler. As distasteful as Engler’s views are to the vast majority of the Jewish community, it is important that we be aware of what is really happening on our campuses.
See the story here at Israel Behind the News
Friday, February 12, 2010
Responses to University Student Anti-Semitism
by Sherwin Pomerantz
Just in this past week we have seen a number of instances of anti-Israel (read: anti-semitic) outbursts aimed at speakers who have been scheduled to appear at various universities around the world.
For example, the appearance of Israel’s Ambassador to the U.S. Michael Oren at the University of California/Irvine was met by numerous verbal outbursts against him and against the “apartheid” State of Israel during his presentation sponsored by the school’s Political Science Department.
Israel’s Deputy Minister of Foreign Affairs, Danny Ayalon, who is also a former Ambassador to the U.S., was verbally assaulted at a speech he tried to give at Oxford University earlier this week.
BenGurion University of the Negev’s Professor of History and prolific writer, Benny Morris, was recently dis-invited by the Israel Society at Cambridge University after protestors accused him of being guilty of “Islamaphobia” and “racism.”
While universities have never been a source of significant support for Israel, of late the chances of any Israeli speaker appearing at a university forum anywhere in the west without being harassed or verbally assaulted are almost nil.
And yet, what is our response as Jews and as Israelis? In articles that appeared in this morning’s papers here the Ministry of Foreign Affairs has taken the position that this kind of verbal haranguing and protest is standard on university campuses and that the media is blowing the importance of such actions way out of proportion. I disagree.
For our government to take an official position that this is just more of the same and for the organized Jewish community in these locations to remain virtually silent gives the impression to the rest of the good citizens of each community that we, as Jews, do not care what the protestors say or what the heckler’s do. Frankly, we cannot afford that kind of passivity as we know, from our history, that passive response to these kinds of anti-semitic acts (even though they may be couched in anti-Israel terms....there is no difference any longer) generally leads to more serious infringements on our rights as members of the human race.
So what should our response be? At a minimum, every time one of these events occurs anywhere in the world, the local Jewish community, along with its real friends and supporters, should immediately mount a massive protest march denouncing the disrespect being shown to visiting dignitaries while underscoring the ultimate danger to all of the community’s citizens should this type of activity be allowed to continue.
16 years ago in Billings, Montana, the (really) small Jewish community there was traumatized when a rock was thrown through the window of the bedroom of a Jewish youngster whose parents had the audacity to exhibit a Chanukah Menorah in the window of the home. At that time the Jewish community stood up and with the incredible support of the majority of the citizens of that city, made the public statement: “Not in Our Town.” The result was an outpouring of support from the local citizenry which sent a message to the bigots that this type of behavior is not acceptable and a national movement began which spread throughout the country.
Today, we must also say, in every location where such anti-semitic events occur, “Not in Our Town” and that message must be loud and clear and supported, as well, by the Government of Israel that has, as its obligation, to be the Government of the Jewish People. Else we abandon our responsibility to our brethren worldwide and to the promise that gave rise to the birth of this country in the first place.
Sherwin Pomerantz is a 26 year resident of Israel and is the President of Atid EDI Ltd., a Jerusalem-based economic development consulting firm. His blog can be seen at www.israelstreet.blogspot.com.
Just in this past week we have seen a number of instances of anti-Israel (read: anti-semitic) outbursts aimed at speakers who have been scheduled to appear at various universities around the world.
For example, the appearance of Israel’s Ambassador to the U.S. Michael Oren at the University of California/Irvine was met by numerous verbal outbursts against him and against the “apartheid” State of Israel during his presentation sponsored by the school’s Political Science Department.
Israel’s Deputy Minister of Foreign Affairs, Danny Ayalon, who is also a former Ambassador to the U.S., was verbally assaulted at a speech he tried to give at Oxford University earlier this week.
BenGurion University of the Negev’s Professor of History and prolific writer, Benny Morris, was recently dis-invited by the Israel Society at Cambridge University after protestors accused him of being guilty of “Islamaphobia” and “racism.”
While universities have never been a source of significant support for Israel, of late the chances of any Israeli speaker appearing at a university forum anywhere in the west without being harassed or verbally assaulted are almost nil.
And yet, what is our response as Jews and as Israelis? In articles that appeared in this morning’s papers here the Ministry of Foreign Affairs has taken the position that this kind of verbal haranguing and protest is standard on university campuses and that the media is blowing the importance of such actions way out of proportion. I disagree.
For our government to take an official position that this is just more of the same and for the organized Jewish community in these locations to remain virtually silent gives the impression to the rest of the good citizens of each community that we, as Jews, do not care what the protestors say or what the heckler’s do. Frankly, we cannot afford that kind of passivity as we know, from our history, that passive response to these kinds of anti-semitic acts (even though they may be couched in anti-Israel terms....there is no difference any longer) generally leads to more serious infringements on our rights as members of the human race.
So what should our response be? At a minimum, every time one of these events occurs anywhere in the world, the local Jewish community, along with its real friends and supporters, should immediately mount a massive protest march denouncing the disrespect being shown to visiting dignitaries while underscoring the ultimate danger to all of the community’s citizens should this type of activity be allowed to continue.
16 years ago in Billings, Montana, the (really) small Jewish community there was traumatized when a rock was thrown through the window of the bedroom of a Jewish youngster whose parents had the audacity to exhibit a Chanukah Menorah in the window of the home. At that time the Jewish community stood up and with the incredible support of the majority of the citizens of that city, made the public statement: “Not in Our Town.” The result was an outpouring of support from the local citizenry which sent a message to the bigots that this type of behavior is not acceptable and a national movement began which spread throughout the country.
Today, we must also say, in every location where such anti-semitic events occur, “Not in Our Town” and that message must be loud and clear and supported, as well, by the Government of Israel that has, as its obligation, to be the Government of the Jewish People. Else we abandon our responsibility to our brethren worldwide and to the promise that gave rise to the birth of this country in the first place.
Sherwin Pomerantz is a 26 year resident of Israel and is the President of Atid EDI Ltd., a Jerusalem-based economic development consulting firm. His blog can be seen at www.israelstreet.blogspot.com.
Monday, February 8, 2010
Israel on Canadian college campuses; an up-hill battle
by Noam Bedein, Director of the Sderot Media Center, www.SderotMedia.org.il
Presenting the human side of Sderot, Israel and the western Negev would seem innocuous enough, as it is the only region in the western world where rockets and missiles target a civilian population. The people of southern Israel have their own story to share.
Yet after a 10-day visit to Canadian college campuses, organized by Hillel Canada and the CIJA umbrella organization of Canadian Jewry, I discovered that even Sderot residents must fight for their legitimate right to live in the land of Israel.
The purpose of this trip was to balance the after-effects of the “Gaza narrative”, exactly one year after Israel's 21-day Operation Cast Lead in the Gaza Strip.
On Canadian college campuses, the challenge became to justify the very existence of the city of Sderot.
This was best exemplified by an article published in a Winnipeg student newspaper, penned by a Palestinian-Canadian sociology student. This student amazingly attacked the credibility of another student for sharing her experiences visiting Sderot. This student had described her shock at the ’15 second’ alarm, known as the “Color Red,” which warns Sderot residents of only a few seconds to escape to safety from the time the missile is fired from Gaza to the time it explodes in Sderot.
The Palestinian student showed little sympathy for Sderot under fire:
“Sderot’ is actually a settlement on the Palestinian land of Najd, an illegally occupied territory stolen from Palestinians. It is a town created on the ashes of an ethnically cleansed and defaced Palestinian village....You want to talk about ‘terror’? Najd’s Palestinian villagers were expelled on May 13th, 1948 by Israeli forces before Israel was even declared a state.”
Here is a well-educated student born in Canada, with Palestinian descent, that calls the Israeli town of Sderot an illegitimate “settlement” constructed on the ruins of an Arab village abandoned during the 1948 war. Indeed this same student makes no acknowledgement of the historical fact that between 1951-1953, the Jews that settled in Sderot were from among the 850,000 Jews expelled in masses from Arab countries in the Middle East. During and after the 1948 war, 670,000 Palestinian Arab refugees were fled or forced from their homes.
Indeed, this Canadian-Palestinian college student is not the first to rationalize the thousands of aerial attacks and terrorizing of Sderot and southern Israel civilians.
“You know why Sderot is under rocket fire? Because there was an Arab village called Najd,” began a BBC reporter in an interview. I recall the reporter sitting in our Sderot Media Center office trying to find a ‘reasonable excuse’ to justify rocket fire against a civilian population.
Ironically, most Israelis/Jews do not even know that Palestinians and their leadership define Sderot as an illegal ‘settlement,’ while under international law it is undisputedly a city in the State of Israel.
Indeed, the first question I often ask student audiences during presentations is the following:
“If Sderot is a settlement and two miles northeast of Sderot lies the ruins of the Arab village called Najd, which the Palestinians say had a population of 30 families, who now live in the United Nations refugee camps in Gaza, what’s the justification for Jews to live in Sderot or anywhere else in Israel?”
The challenge today is to first actually ask these basic questions, before throwing around answers or solutions for the modern Arab-Israeli conflict.
“What is our right, as Jews and as Israelis, to this country in our homeland? Do we have any rights to this land at all?”
This is the way I was able to get across and present Israel’s perspective to Muslims, to pro-Palestinians, Israel critics and to the international press. By asking this basic question, we ask everyone to realize that Israel is the only independent country in the world whose legitimacy as a state is being questioned.
The leadership and governing bodies of the Palestinian side do not recognize Sderot's establishment in the first years of the creation of the Jewish state, while most Israelis/Jews have accepted a two- state solution.
As another Canadian-Palestinian student expressed himself during my presentation at Carleton University in Ottawa, quite matter of fact:
”You Jews dreamt to go back to your home land after 2,000 years... Why do you think we will stop teaching our children to dream to return to our homes in Al-Majdal (Ashkelon) only after 60 years?”
In other words, educated Canadian born Palestinian students living comfortably abroad, view Sderot quite simply as an illegal settlement and do not recognize the Jewish State of Israel. They do not accept my existence as an Israeli. So does the opposite apply to a Palestinian raised in a United Nations refugee camp, who has not been given any solution or hope for the past 60 years- (even though the UN has resettled more than 50 million refugees worldwide since World War II), will that Palestinian recognize my existence as an Israeli?
Instead, Palestinian education focuses on the preparation of the Palestinian people for the ‘right of return’ to homes and villages from 1948 in Israel which no longer exist. Homes and villages for example in and around cities like Sderot, Ashkelon, Ashdod, Beersheba, and more which have all been under terrorist missile fire.
“So, what’s your solution to this reality?” asked students on each of the Canadian campuses that I visited. In the hundreds of presentations I have given in the past three years I always answer, “I’m not here to present you a solution, I’m here to present the problem.”
The answer to that logical question is that there may not be any instant “solution.” Yet that should not exempt students from knowing the reality of what people in Israel have to cope with - and, in the case of Sderot, that their unique miraculous rocket reality is like no other in the world right now. Rockets have become a daily routine of life in Israel, where one civilian population is being targeted by rockets, rocket-launchers take cover under another civilian population on the other side of the border.
Can this definition of terrorism be understood from a typical 5-second daily news broadcast in Israel in the past four years?
“Two rockets fell outside of Sderot today. No injuries, and no damages,” is how the typical broadcast or news update would read, followed by a weather report in Israel.
These five-second news reports have now tallied up to 311 attacks and including 20 different types of rockets, Iranian missiles and mortars fired from Gaza towards southern Israel, since the END of the military operation in Gaza on January 18, 2009.
If things were truly clear about our rights as Jews to live in Israel, I would not have found myself providing a testimony to a Jew, Judge Richard Goldstone in Geneva. I was allowed a 30-minute presentation where I described to the Goldstone Commission the eight-years of life under rocket fire and concluded by raising my hands in front of them:
“I do not have enough fingers on my hands to count the amount of times rockets exploded only 10 meters from a kindergarten packed with children...”
“Why do we have to wait until a kindergarten or classroom full of children suffers a direct hit by a rocket, in order for us Israel, to have the international support and sympathy to do what is right to protect our own citizens?”
This was the question I put forth to Judge Goldstone and the rest of the panel of UN judges, which was met only with stone silence.
The time has come to raise these questions to college students around the world, and to provide them with proper and accurate answers for them to stand up for Israel and for themselves as proud supporters of Israel.
By generating such awareness, we promote peace without instant solutions and we force the world of public opinion to acknowledge the real barriers for peace, beginning with the continuing refusal of the Arab world to recognize the legitimacy of Sderot and of Israel in their neighborhood.
Noam Bedein is the director of the Sderot Media Center.
Presenting the human side of Sderot, Israel and the western Negev would seem innocuous enough, as it is the only region in the western world where rockets and missiles target a civilian population. The people of southern Israel have their own story to share.
Yet after a 10-day visit to Canadian college campuses, organized by Hillel Canada and the CIJA umbrella organization of Canadian Jewry, I discovered that even Sderot residents must fight for their legitimate right to live in the land of Israel.
The purpose of this trip was to balance the after-effects of the “Gaza narrative”, exactly one year after Israel's 21-day Operation Cast Lead in the Gaza Strip.
On Canadian college campuses, the challenge became to justify the very existence of the city of Sderot.
This was best exemplified by an article published in a Winnipeg student newspaper, penned by a Palestinian-Canadian sociology student. This student amazingly attacked the credibility of another student for sharing her experiences visiting Sderot. This student had described her shock at the ’15 second’ alarm, known as the “Color Red,” which warns Sderot residents of only a few seconds to escape to safety from the time the missile is fired from Gaza to the time it explodes in Sderot.
The Palestinian student showed little sympathy for Sderot under fire:
“Sderot’ is actually a settlement on the Palestinian land of Najd, an illegally occupied territory stolen from Palestinians. It is a town created on the ashes of an ethnically cleansed and defaced Palestinian village....You want to talk about ‘terror’? Najd’s Palestinian villagers were expelled on May 13th, 1948 by Israeli forces before Israel was even declared a state.”
Here is a well-educated student born in Canada, with Palestinian descent, that calls the Israeli town of Sderot an illegitimate “settlement” constructed on the ruins of an Arab village abandoned during the 1948 war. Indeed this same student makes no acknowledgement of the historical fact that between 1951-1953, the Jews that settled in Sderot were from among the 850,000 Jews expelled in masses from Arab countries in the Middle East. During and after the 1948 war, 670,000 Palestinian Arab refugees were fled or forced from their homes.
Indeed, this Canadian-Palestinian college student is not the first to rationalize the thousands of aerial attacks and terrorizing of Sderot and southern Israel civilians.
“You know why Sderot is under rocket fire? Because there was an Arab village called Najd,” began a BBC reporter in an interview. I recall the reporter sitting in our Sderot Media Center office trying to find a ‘reasonable excuse’ to justify rocket fire against a civilian population.
Ironically, most Israelis/Jews do not even know that Palestinians and their leadership define Sderot as an illegal ‘settlement,’ while under international law it is undisputedly a city in the State of Israel.
Indeed, the first question I often ask student audiences during presentations is the following:
“If Sderot is a settlement and two miles northeast of Sderot lies the ruins of the Arab village called Najd, which the Palestinians say had a population of 30 families, who now live in the United Nations refugee camps in Gaza, what’s the justification for Jews to live in Sderot or anywhere else in Israel?”
The challenge today is to first actually ask these basic questions, before throwing around answers or solutions for the modern Arab-Israeli conflict.
“What is our right, as Jews and as Israelis, to this country in our homeland? Do we have any rights to this land at all?”
This is the way I was able to get across and present Israel’s perspective to Muslims, to pro-Palestinians, Israel critics and to the international press. By asking this basic question, we ask everyone to realize that Israel is the only independent country in the world whose legitimacy as a state is being questioned.
The leadership and governing bodies of the Palestinian side do not recognize Sderot's establishment in the first years of the creation of the Jewish state, while most Israelis/Jews have accepted a two- state solution.
As another Canadian-Palestinian student expressed himself during my presentation at Carleton University in Ottawa, quite matter of fact:
”You Jews dreamt to go back to your home land after 2,000 years... Why do you think we will stop teaching our children to dream to return to our homes in Al-Majdal (Ashkelon) only after 60 years?”
In other words, educated Canadian born Palestinian students living comfortably abroad, view Sderot quite simply as an illegal settlement and do not recognize the Jewish State of Israel. They do not accept my existence as an Israeli. So does the opposite apply to a Palestinian raised in a United Nations refugee camp, who has not been given any solution or hope for the past 60 years- (even though the UN has resettled more than 50 million refugees worldwide since World War II), will that Palestinian recognize my existence as an Israeli?
Instead, Palestinian education focuses on the preparation of the Palestinian people for the ‘right of return’ to homes and villages from 1948 in Israel which no longer exist. Homes and villages for example in and around cities like Sderot, Ashkelon, Ashdod, Beersheba, and more which have all been under terrorist missile fire.
“So, what’s your solution to this reality?” asked students on each of the Canadian campuses that I visited. In the hundreds of presentations I have given in the past three years I always answer, “I’m not here to present you a solution, I’m here to present the problem.”
The answer to that logical question is that there may not be any instant “solution.” Yet that should not exempt students from knowing the reality of what people in Israel have to cope with - and, in the case of Sderot, that their unique miraculous rocket reality is like no other in the world right now. Rockets have become a daily routine of life in Israel, where one civilian population is being targeted by rockets, rocket-launchers take cover under another civilian population on the other side of the border.
Can this definition of terrorism be understood from a typical 5-second daily news broadcast in Israel in the past four years?
“Two rockets fell outside of Sderot today. No injuries, and no damages,” is how the typical broadcast or news update would read, followed by a weather report in Israel.
These five-second news reports have now tallied up to 311 attacks and including 20 different types of rockets, Iranian missiles and mortars fired from Gaza towards southern Israel, since the END of the military operation in Gaza on January 18, 2009.
If things were truly clear about our rights as Jews to live in Israel, I would not have found myself providing a testimony to a Jew, Judge Richard Goldstone in Geneva. I was allowed a 30-minute presentation where I described to the Goldstone Commission the eight-years of life under rocket fire and concluded by raising my hands in front of them:
“I do not have enough fingers on my hands to count the amount of times rockets exploded only 10 meters from a kindergarten packed with children...”
“Why do we have to wait until a kindergarten or classroom full of children suffers a direct hit by a rocket, in order for us Israel, to have the international support and sympathy to do what is right to protect our own citizens?”
This was the question I put forth to Judge Goldstone and the rest of the panel of UN judges, which was met only with stone silence.
The time has come to raise these questions to college students around the world, and to provide them with proper and accurate answers for them to stand up for Israel and for themselves as proud supporters of Israel.
By generating such awareness, we promote peace without instant solutions and we force the world of public opinion to acknowledge the real barriers for peace, beginning with the continuing refusal of the Arab world to recognize the legitimacy of Sderot and of Israel in their neighborhood.
Noam Bedein is the director of the Sderot Media Center.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Posts
