A celebrity face-off over Israel at the Toronto International Film Festival in September marked the latest skirmish in a long-percolating Palestinian effort to promote an artistic and cultural boycott of Israel.
On one side, a lineup that included Viggo Mortensen, Wallace Shawn, Danny Glover, Julie Christie, David Byrne and Naomi Klein signed a protest letter against the festival’s decision this year to partner with the city of Tel Aviv on the occasion of the Israeli city’s 100th anniversary.
In rebuttal, a constellation of stars including Natalie Portman, Jerry Seinfeld, Sacha Baron Cohen, Lenny Kravitz, Lisa Kudrow and Ivan Reitman signed a letter supporting the film festival and decrying the protest.
The war of celebrity words had no impact on the festival itself, which was scheduled to run through Sept. 19. Talk at the glittering parties that brighten Toronto during the festival was more concerned with Drew Barrymore’s new hairdo – and occasionally, the actual films – than the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. But among activists, the Toronto film festival fracas marked yet another opportunity for disseminating a message that has grown louder since the military campaign in Gaza last winter.
What happened in Toronto was not intended to be a boycott, per se. In their letter objecting to the Tel Aviv program, the signers stressed, “We do not protest the individual Israeli filmmakers included” in the festival, “nor do we in any way suggest that Israeli films should be unwelcome at TIFF.”
Indeed, the Israeli film “Lebanon,” a brutal depiction of the experiences of four Israeli soldiers in the 1982 Lebanon War, was one of the festival’s most popular entries this year.
But the letter-signers publicly registered their view that by forging the celebratory Tel Aviv partnership, “TIFF, whether intentionally or not, has become complicit in the Israeli propaganda machine.”
“The emphasis on ‘diversity’ in [the Tel Aviv partnership program] is empty given the absence of Palestinian filmmakers in the program,” they
wrote. “Furthermore, what this description does not say is that Tel Aviv is built on destroyed Palestinian villages, and that the city of Jaffa, Palestine’s main cultural hub until 1948, was annexed to Tel Aviv after the mass exiling of the Palestinian population.”
Supporters of the film festival quickly shot off their own letter. The response, however, appeared to be focused on the boycott that the protesters disavowed. “We don’t need another blacklist,” declared the rebuttal letter, distributed by the Jewish federations of Toronto and Los Angeles. “Anyone who has actually seen recent Israeli cinema, movies that are political and personal, comic and tragic, often critical, knows they are in no way a propaganda arm for any government policy.”
The flap in Toronto is just the latest in an ongoing culture war over Israel’s public image, and one small branch of the larger movement to boycott Israel. That movement, with both cultural and economic fronts, seems to be gaining strength since Israel’s military campaign in Gaza last winter.
Israeli officials are well aware of this. After the Gaza War ended in January, the Israeli government embarked on a not-at-all-secret $2 million image rebranding. But the organizers of the Toronto film festival say they chose Tel Aviv as a spotlight city based on its vigorous cultural life and artistic ferment, not because of political pressure, and there’s no reason to disbelieve them. After all, the films included in the festival’s City-to-City program portray a complex, sometimes harshly critical view of Israel’s military operations. Festival organizers say they received no financial support from Tel Aviv or Israel government sources, though Israel’s film fund did pay for some filmmakers to travel to the festival in Toronto, which is standard practice in many countries.
Regardless of the festival organizers’ motives, the Israeli government has been open about its goal of promoting culture to counter images of war and Palestinian suffering.
“We will send well-known novelists and writers overseas, theater companies, exhibits,” Arye Mekel, the Israeli Foreign Ministry’s deputy director general for cultural affairs, told The New York Times in March. “This way, you show Israel’s prettier face, so we are not thought of purely in the context of war.”
Even before Operation Cast Lead and the backlash it provoked internationally, Israeli officials were working on rebranding. Amir Gissin, the Israeli consul general in Toronto, cheerfully chatted with the Canadian Jewish News in August 2008 about plans to promote Israel’s cultural and scientific achievements.
“The way to fix negative images of Israel is to present Israel in a positive light elsewhere,” Gissin said.
Supporters of the Palestinian cause have been paying attention, and are determined to cast a shadow on that positive light.
Led by prominent Canadian author and activist Naomi Klein, the filmmakers, artists and writers opposed to the festival’s partnership with Tel Aviv wrote, “Looking at modern, sophisticated Tel Aviv without also considering the city’s past and the realities of Israeli occupation of the West Bank and the Gaza strip would be like rhapsodizing about the beauty and elegant lifestyles in white-only Cape Town or Johannesburg during Apartheid.”
Jane Fonda initially signed the protest letter, which was published September 3, but apparently she had second thoughts. On September 14, the actress and longtime activist issued a statement saying she had not read or considered the original letter carefully enough.
“Some of the words in the protest letter did not come from my heart, words that are unnecessarily inflammatory: The simplistic depiction of Tel Aviv as a city ‘built on destroyed Palestinian villages,’ for instance, and the omission of any mention of Hamas’s 8-month-long rocket and mortar attacks on the town of Sderot and the western Negev to which Israel was responding when it launched its war on Gaza,” Fonda wrote.
More and more artists may find themselves in Fonda’s shoes as the cultural war continues. Toronto is only the latest battleground; film festivals in Edinburgh, Melbourne, London and Tel Aviv itself have all been targeted by pro-Palestinian boycotters. And film isn’t the only medium being scrutinized: A Toronto museum’s exhibit of the Dead Sea Scrolls this past summer drew protests from Palestinian supporters who claim that the scrolls were looted, and critics unsuccessfully tried to pressure Madonna not to perform in Israel.
Meanwhile, singer Leonard Cohen is going ahead with his September 24 concert in Tel Aviv, despite protests that have dogged his world tour. Cohen plans to make the concert a fundraiser for Israeli and Palestinian groups working for peace.
Even that gesture, however, was not without controversy, as Amnesty International recently withdrew from its agreement to administer the Cohen concert funds, in response to Palestinian complaints.
Contact Rebecca Dube at dube@forward.com
The Forward welcomes reader comments in order to promote thoughtful discussion on issues of importance to the Jewish community. In the interest of maintaining a civil forum, the Forward requires that all commenters be appropriately respectful toward our writers, other commenters and the subjects of the articles. Vigorous debate and reasoned critique are welcome; name-calling and personal invective are not. While we generally do not seek to edit or actively moderate comments, the Forward reserves the right to remove comments for any reason.
Copyright © 2013, Forward Association, Inc. All Rights Reserved.
Tracing the Jewish Origins of the Holy Ghost
Forced Out by Nazis, Grandmother Returns With Family to Germany
Mother of Jewish Teen Killed on Brooklyn Bridge Speaks Out
Remembering French-Jewish Writer Viviane Forrester
Google Earth for the 16th Century Mapmaking Set
You've successfully signed up!
It disgusts me that self-hating Jews like Naomi Klein and Eve Gensler and their far-left liberal friends single out the State of Israel while they keep silent about the denial of human rights in many other countries.
I am a Jewish American who is for a two-state solution to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, and I do not approve of the settlers, but I know from firsthand experience that the overwhelming majority of Israelis badly desire peace and they do not discriminate against their fellow Arab citizens. The fact, which the Hollywood leftists who signed the boycott letter conveniently forget, is that the Israeli governments under Prime Ministers Rabin, Peres, Barak, Sharon and Olmert all were for a two-state solution and all of them gave land back to the Arabs. Every Israeli government has been a democracy, unlike every other country in the Middle East, and if you go online you can read several different Israeli media that criticize the Israeli government and leaders every day. Israeli filmmakers have continued to put out artistic works that are antiwar, anti their own government and pro-peace. There is total freedom of religion, assembly, speech and the press in Israel, and there are Arab members of the Knesset, Israel's parliament, that severely criticize their own government. There is no apartheid in Israel. Go to a clinic and you will see Arabs and Jews sitting side by side in the waiting rooms receiving equal treatment in the state-run health care system.
The far-left-wing fanatics mask their anti-Semitism by declaring support of a boycott against Israeli universities and entertainers and artists, but they are strangely silent about the oppression and denial of freedom in the Sudan, Iran, North Korea, Saudia Arabia, Syria, Russia, Zimbabwe, Venezuela, Burma and Cuba. They never opened their mouths when Moslems were being slaughtered in Kosovo by the Serbs or when Russia murders journalists who dared to criticize Putin. They reserve all their animus and hatred for the only democracy in the Middle East, Israel, the only state where there is freedom for everyone. Israel is far from perfect, but Israel is a democracy, and it is because of this fact that whatever imperfections Israel has can be corrected.
Anybody who believes as Mark does that the Israelis offered the Palestinians a two-state solution should read Gush Shalom's document "Barak's Generous Offer." http://www.gush-shalom.org/generous/generous.html
So, Barak's offer not being enough for Palestinians makes everything Mark said untrue and the protest against a Canadian Film festival for having the audacity to portray Tel Aviv in a manner they disapproved of ok?
Maybe we should just propose to Palestinians and Israelis to stop attempting to have any normalcy in ther lives and just dedicate themselves to anahilating each other as their full time jobs. I'm sure plenty on the Left and the Right in America and Europe would be delighted. Frankly, if these people cared at all, they would be using their celebrity status to bring investment and development to Gaza and the West Bank, to support activities that promote tolerance, dialogue, and democracitc values on both sides. Most of all they would be using their access to pressure politicians around the world to work constructively for real, permanent peace, instead of cheerleading one way or another.
A Blizzard of Lies
"This fact sheet is a response to the campaign of disinformation being waged against the Toronto International Film Festival (TIFF) protest letter, "The Toronto Declaration: No Celebration of Occupation,” [1] signed by 1,000 people including Viggo Mortenson, Danny Glover, Naomi Klein, Harry Belafonte, Wallace Shawn, Eve Ensler, Jane Fonda along with many Israelis and Palestinians. This year, TIFF decided to put a celebratory spotlight on Tel Aviv at the festival, in line with the goals of the Israeli Consulate’s “Brand Israel” program. In its own words, the “Brand Israel” program aims to publicize Israeli culture in order to distract public attention from its human rights record. The letter of protest objects to this politicization of the film festival, saying it is inappropriate given Israel’s nearly 42-year occupation of the Palestinian Territories, the recent assault and continuing siege on Gaza, and the history of and ongoing dispossession of Palestinians in Tel Aviv-Jaffa itself.
Since the release of the protest letter, public figures and media outlets have spread false charges and misinformation about the letter, some even going so far as to raise slanderous accusations against some letter signers.
This fact sheet refutes three key false charges: 1) That the protest letter unfairly singles out Israel. 2) That the letter calls for a boycott of the Film Festival and Israeli films. 3) That the letter in any way delegitimizes Tel Aviv.
These charges are all false, as we explain below:"
http://www.jewishvoiceforpeace.org/publish/article_1212.shtml
Setting the record straight: Response to historical distortions, TIFF
"Setting the record straight: a JVP [Jewish Voice for Peace] response to fabricated and misleading history being used to attack the Toronto Declaration, the letter signed by over 1,000 artists and filmmakers protesting the Toronto International Film Festival’s choice of Tel Aviv for a celebratory spotlight.
CLAIMS v FACTS Stand With Us, a US-based right wing Israel advocacy organization, says, “The Toronto Declaration is filled with misinformation, distortions, and lack of context.“ In fact, it is the Stand with Us “fact sheet” that is filled with misinformation and outright fabrications of history. We’ve consulted with historians to get to the bottom of Stand With Us claims."
For claims v facts:
http://www.jewishvoiceforpeace.org/publish/article_1213.shtml
Will the moderators of this website please monitor Michael Levin's spamming of this site with his Jewish Voice for Peace propaganda?
Carmella, you are calling for censorship.
That violates our Jewish traditions.
Norman- Not that I agree or disagree with you, but which one of the commandments outlaws censorship?
On Eriv Rosh Hashana we are all asked to balance the ledger and know before whom we stand.
In the conflict between Israel and Hamas (PLO, Syria, Iran, etc) I stand with Israel. Is there any one of you, who read this article, prefer Hamas/Islamic rulers over (imperfect) Israeli democracy? Anyone who singles Israel (and just Israel) for boycott is simply a Jew-hater. I do not hear movie elites ever boycotting Russia or Iran or Saudi Arabia. Perhaps these progressives never heard of other countries (besides Israel) that truly despise human rights including Arab rights.
Rather than censor the indefatigueable JVP promoter Michael Levin, here are some links re: JVP that Michael Levin and possibly Norman won't appreciate at all.
adamholland.blogspot.com/.../jewish-voice-for-peace-for-freedom-of.html adamholland.blogspot.com/.../jerusalem-string-quartet-faces-uk.html http://www.bluetruth.net/2008/05/jewish-voice-for-peace-and-new-blood.html
And here's a link to a You Tube clip where you can hear the JVP audience members trying to censor (shout down and laugh derisively at) a speaker who doesn't buy JVP's propaganda about Rachel Corrie, the ISM and even the takeover of the Church of Nativity by Palestinian belligerent combatants, which the audience seems to deny ever happened. They even cheer for Mahmoud Achmadinehjad. Shameful.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7k66uGD5nuk&feature=player_embedded
Natalie Portman deserves a round of applause. She's been a stand up girl all along the line on this issue.
I welcome Lbnaz' links, as long as people understand that they are taken out of context, as you can see from this more complete account which links to videos of the complete event.
They didn't shout down the speaker, and they were polite until he started insulting them. He falsely accused them of being concerned about Palestinian deaths but not Israeli deaths -- which is quite an insult. As Muzzlewatch points out, can you imagine AIPAC inviting a speaker on the other side at a screening of a pro-Israel film?
http://www.muzzlewatch.com/2009/07/27/san-francisco-jewish-film-festival-what-happened-on-saturday/#more-592
Initially, the audience was quite respectful of Harris comments, and unanimously applauded his assertion that Israeli victims of suicide bombings, along with Rachel Corrie, should all be alive today. It was only when when Harris began attacking the film, the festival, the ISM, and the co-presenters that things got ugly. There certainly were a lot interruptions of booing, as well as more thunderous applause when he mentioned JVP and the AFSC. It should not be said, however, that the audience didn’t let Harris’ speak.
... In one question, Cindy was asked was whether she had met with the families of IDF members killed in the conflict. Cindy not only answered yes, but added that she had met with the parents of suicide-bombing victims as well. She went on to ask us to mourn the deaths of her daughter, Israelis, AND Palestinians, for which the audience applauded. The contrast between her and Harris, who left out the Palestinians, could not have been more striking.
I completely agree with Norman. Decent people should not only cry for Jewish babies that were murdered in Holocaust. They should be equally upset about SS troops that died for Hitler or were executed for murdering Jews, Gypsies, and others. People are people. They all should live longer. So we should feel for both the victims of suicide bombers and for suicide bombers. We should be sorry for Jewish parents who lost their children to suicide bombers, and for Arab mothers that celebrate their sons and daughters going to "Heaven" for murdering Jewish kids. We should cry for victims of 9/11 who of course include 19 Arab pilots. And of course we should cry for Rachel Corrie that did everything in her power to guarantee that more Jewish kids would be murdered. Her mother is so kind, she met with the parents of suicide-bombing victims. Now we need to mourn her daughter who died trying to protect the houses of suicide murderers. I do not understand those parents of suicide-bombing victims. They should not agree to meet the mother of terrorist supporter.
Michael Levin is intentionally misrepresenting what transpired at the San Francisco Jewish Film Festival. It was disgraceful beyond measure. The screening of Rachel - and local Jewish outrage - led to a mass gathering of leftist anti-Semites.
If you don't believe me, read this boastful chest thump by one of the SF Bay area's most virulent Jew haters:
http://www.theamericanmuslim.org/tam.php/features/articles/showing_of_rachel_in_san_francisco/0017481
Earth to the California actors who signed the letter decrying Tel Aviv and Israel: YOU LIVE ON LAND THAT WAS STOLEN FROM MEXICO IN THE MEXICAN AMERICAN WAR OF 1846!!!!! How obtuse and blind can you people be?
I cannot help but note the vitriol, hysterical hatred, and dishonesty informing many of these posts. From Mark who reduces the arguments criticizing Israel to the boogieman of "Far-left anti-Semitism" and, like many here, argues like the obtuse fellow pulled over for speeding, "Why are you picking on me? Other people break the law as well!" while all the while seemingly arguing that Israel is in fact a "State of all its citizens," when the very phrase is an anathema there, perceived as code for the destruction of the Jewish State.
To Efrat, who seems to argue that the Palestinians were merely being churlish in not accepting the unacceptable, and further appears not to understand that Israel's stranglehold on Gaza refuses to allow anything into Gaza that might rebuild the infrastructure and economy, along with the most innocuous of everyday items, and that the situation in the WB is not all that different.
To Alex K. who essentially again voices the argument, straight out of a playground sandbox, that sure Israel is guilty, but so are many others, so why pick on us? To which, the only answer can be, "Tell it to the Judge."
Then there's Sonya, who knows little about Rachel Corrie or her mother, and apparently doesn't care. The house Rachel died defending was not that of a terrorist, and not even the IDF claimed it to be, nor was Rachel in any sense working toward killing "more Jewish kids." Both Rachel and her mother supported and support nonviolence. But, what the hey, just keep repeating the same dishonest story over and again and someone will believe it.
In this Manichean universe there are only those who support Israel down the line and anti-Semites who wish only to kill Jews, while questions of human rights and civil liberties are dismissed as mere trickery designed to further the destruction of Israel. Orwell was right, the "tom-tom of latter day tribalism' is the curse of our century.
Dear Grif,
Ye moch shem'o ve zeek ro'.
I had to get that in before sunset. Now I can really begin to atone for my sins.
David
Here again are the first 2 links from the list I posted earlier, this time copied and pasted properly:
http://adamholland.blogspot.com/2008/06/jewish-voice-for-peace-for-freedom-of.html http://adamholland.blogspot.com/2008/07/jerusalem-string-quartet-faces-uk.html
I am tired of inarticulate Hollywooders making hip protests when they have no earthly idea of history. There were NO DESTROYED VILLAGES were Tel Aviv stands. That's why Tel Aviv was settled. It was swamp and the Jews made good use of it (Long before the state of Israel). There will be peace when the Palestinian leadership learns to love their children more than the hate the Jews. This is true of Hollywood. Hollywood already tried to screw the Jews with the stupid blacklist. (Watch Woody Allen's "The Front" if you don't have time for research and reading). We have all the well meaning self hating Jews talking about surrender. Fine. Where are the equivalents on the Palestinian side. Hey Palestinians "GIVE PEACE A CHANCE!!"
Gush Shalom? B'Tselem? Peace Now? "Jewish Voice for Peace"?
Funny that there is no Gush Salaam, "Muslim Voice for Peace", Arab/Muslim Peace Now?
Wonder why?
Mark,
Why so simplistic? What makes Naomi Klein and Eve Gensler "self-hating Jews" just because they support the boycott against Israel? You can disagree with them, but try avoing the childlike attacks. They do nothing for Jews.
Also, far-left? Do you even know what that means, because it doesn't men liberal. And it isn't necessary. There are people for and against the boycott from the Left to the Right. Whether liberal, conservative, socialist, communists...whatever.
I also am a Jewish American who supports either the one- or two-state solution. I also know that like Israeli Jews, most Palestinians and Israeli Arabs also want peace. I'm also not naive or biased to ignore the discriminatin that they go throught.
"The fact, which the Hollywood leftists", back to the silly name calling again, "who signed the boycott letter conveniently forget, is that the Israeli governments under Prime Ministers Rabin, Peres, Barak, Sharon and Olmert all were for a two-state solution and all of them gave land back to the Arabs."
I think it is more likely that you don't know what you are talking about. For most of his life Sharon (and Olmert) were against it. Second, the "two-state solution" was on Israel's terms and didn't benefit Palestinians (read more as suggested above). This situation - like the world - is cloudded in gray, stop thinking in black and white.
"There is total freedom of religion, assembly, speech and the press in Israel, and there are Arab members of the Knesset, Israel's parliament, that severely criticize their own government."
Yet no civil marriage, religous control in the hands of a few, Beta Y'raeli kids not being allowed in certain schools - but these are different topics. What about housing discrimination? What about the "Naqba" not being allowed in school textbooks (not to mention the rather retarded school system - secular, Jewish, Arab)?
I also find it interesting when people like you always wanna bring up other countries. First, many of the people and organizations do address discrimination in other countries, it's just that people like you don't bother paying attention. This way you can use the arguements, "why just Israel?". Second, as a Jew, discrimination by Jews in Israel is higher on my radar then other places.
But then, why pay any attention to me? I'm just a far-leftist, anti-Israeli self-hating Jew...
Someone wrote: "I also am a Jewish American who supports either the one- or two-state solution."
In other words you're ok with both a Palestinian state beside Israel and equally ok with the massacre and ethnic cleansing of about 5-6 million Israeli Jews and all the violence and loss of life on both sides it would take to implement a one state solution. Good for you. But horrible for people who have to be subjected to the violence you're ok with. And what difference does it make to your opinion that you're Jewish or American? Next.
Yes Grif, basic infrastructure items cannot reach them, but somehow these can:
http://www.ynetnews.com/articles/0,7340,L-3778091,00.html
With the desperate situation in Gaza, I wonder who can afford a 2009 vehicle.
And there is always my favorite European activist ever, during her stay in Gaza, experiencing the struggle first hand:
http://www.zimbio.com/pictures/EP3VVd8BA0n/Blair+Sister+Law+Lauren+Booth+Stuck+Gaza/0HV1pCA59w7
Of course White priveleged people go to Gaza and think it is the poorest place they have ever seen. That's because in most cases it is the poorest place these people have ever been in their lives. I encourage parents in the US and Europe to send their kids to study in Latin America (where I grew up), Africa or Southeast Asia. They will certainly gain a better perspective of the world. Reading about Lauren Booth comparing Gaza to Darfur (a place she has never been to) while looking at these pictures of her stay in Gaza is the perfect display of the myopic view Westerners have of the world around them. You would think that someone who calls herself a journalist would at least google Darfur, to have some idea of what it looks like before making such comparison.
obviously the people who signed against israel are ignorant of the truth of the region - and need to be educated. and jews like the ones who run the sf festival, should think twice before screening films that only fuel the flames. like the dylan song "neighborhood bully" it always seems easy to take it out on israel for defending themselves - if you want to do the right thing, send the julie christie's of the world books that depict what really happened in the middle east!
Go natalie Portman!
Lbnaz wrote:
>Were you there? How do you know Rachel Corrie was defending a house when she was killed?
Lbnaz,
How do you know the Germans killed 6 million Jews? Were you there?
I didn't think a Jew would be so clueless about logic that he couldn't understand a simple logical syllogism, but it seems to be necessary to spell it out.
You told grif that he couldn't know that Rachel Corrie wasn't defending a terrorist house because he wasn't there.
If you're going to use that logic, then you can't know anything if you weren't there.
That includes the Holocaust.
But in reality, your argument isn't true. We know lots of things even though we weren't there, from eyewitness accounts and secondary sources. We know that Rachel Corrie was killed by a bulldozer. We know that Jews were also killed by bulldozers during the Holocaust.
Yes, I do compare the Nazi killing of Jews with the Israeli killings of Palestinians, and of Rachel Corrie.
Hillel said, That which is hateful to you, do not do unto others. It was hateful when the Nazis murdered our children. Therefore, we should not murder Palestinian children.
Why are the lives of your grandparents and aunt any more precious than the lives of the Rabbu children, http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AfT4QrqOnYM or Dr. al-Aish's children? If the killing of your relatives was so wrong, why aren't you stopping the equally tragic killings of Palestinan children right now?
I am not an anti-Semite, or a self-hating Jew. Those are lies told by people who can't defend Israel from these facts.
I am a better Jew than you, because I do not stand by silently when children are killed.
Hmm, you'd have a better 'claim' to being of higher moral virtue if you did not stand by silently while the islamic fascists intentionally use their children to shield themselves, to hide behind, and to send off as martyrs to gain allah's reward in Paradise.
Jake, do you think there is any justification for this?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AfT4QrqOnYM
Do you think that the soldiers responsible for this should escape prosecution for murder?
"But in reality, your argument isn't true. We know lots of things even though we weren't there, from eyewitness accounts and secondary sources."
I quoted Wikipedia's page on Rachel Corrie which doesn't make the same claims you do. Wikipedia doesn't say that the Israeli sources were lying and that the ISM were telling the truth. The "witnesses" and "secondary sources" you mention are all members of the antizionist one state solution promoting and terrorist violence glorifying ISM. Your entire modus operandi is to blindly and a priori dismiss Israelis as liars if they're Zionists and blindly trust anything any antizionist claims.
Re the Rabbu story:
http://tinyurl.com/m5sz4z
The tragic story of Khaled Abed Rabbo and his three young daughters — said to have been shot in cold blood by an Israeli soldier on Jan. 7 in the northern Gaza Strip as the family waved white flags — has been retold in many outlets, including Time Magazine, the Irish Times, the Washington Post, the Independent, BBC, and the Sydney Morning Herald, among others. Indeed, the Irish Times reports that “Each day, journalists and human rights investigators come to interview the grieving father.” And, as reported by McClatchy News, the Abed Rabbos’ allegation “is one of at least five such white flag incidents that human rights investigators are looking into across the Gaza Strip.”
Yet, human rights investigators and journalists overlook the serious inconsistencies in the varying accounts delivered by Khaled and his relatives, as well as an ambulance driver who claimed to try to help the family. Moreover, early Palestinian accounts of the deaths — as well as early reports in the Los Angeles Times and Ha’aretz — tell an entirely different story which involves neither white flags nor cold-blooded executions of small children.
The Story’s General Outline
Several Western media outlets claim that the Abed Rabbo family was at home in the Abed Rabbo district of Jabalya, in the northern Gaza Strip, close to the Israeli border on Jan. 7, when an Israeli tank unit approached the house and ordered everybody to evacuate. These articles claim that when several family members exited the home waving white flags, they saw two soldiers standing next to a tank. Then a third soldier emerged from the tank and shot the three girls, killing two (2-year-old Amal and 7-year-old Souad) and seriously injuring 4-year-old Samer, in addition to injuring their grandmother with gunfire. The family eventually left the home to seek treatment. (The unclear circumstances of their departure appear further down.) Later the Israeli army reportedly destroyed all the buildings in the area.
Inconsistencies in Khaled Abed Rabbo’s Story
Some media outlets acknowledge that Abed Rabbo’s account is unverifiable, but that doesn’t stop them from repeating it. For instance, Donald Macintyre of the Independent writes: “It so far has been impossible independently to verify Mr. Abed Rabbo’s claim” (“‘I watched an Israeli soldier shoot my two little girls’; Grieving Palestinian father says children were killed after family obeyed order from troops to leave Gaza home,” Jan. 21, 2009). Tim McGirk from Time Magazine also touches on the question of the credibility of the story, but seems satisfied with the family’s account and “genuine” grief. He writes: “Interviews with Abed Rabu’s wife Kauther, his mother-in-law and three neighbors, including Saad Abed Rabu and Khadra Abed Rabu (from the same clan), matched his account of the shootings, and certainly the family’s grief and anger appear genuine” (“Voices from The Rubble,” Jan. 29, 2009). But had McGirk even bothered to consult other Western media outlets, he would have found numerous inconsistencies concerning various aspects of the alleged incident. And, had he gone one step further and checked early Palestinian reports, he would have had a different story all together. The disparities are described below.
Did Any Fighting Immediately Precede the Calls to Come Outside?
Was there fighting right before the Israeli army called on residents to leave their homes? Khaled Abed Rabbo’s account differs in different media outlets, one time saying there was no fighting, and another claiming “the shelling intensified.”
Time (Tim McGirk, Jan. 29): Residents of Jebel al-Kashif recall being warned by the Israelis through loudspeakers to evacuate their homes. “There was no fighting, so we weren’t too worried when the Israelis told us to leave,” Abed Rabu recalls.
McClatchy, (Dion Nissenbaum, Feb. 2): On Jan. 7, Abed Rabbo said, the shelling intensified, and they heard an Israeli soldier calling for people to come out of their homes.
Sydney Morning Herald (Jason Koutsoukis, Jan. 24): Souad Abed Rabbo [Khaled’s mother] was in her apartment on the edge of the Jabalya refugee camp near the Israeli border on January 7 when the call came from Israeli soldiers for everyone in the area to come outside.
Her apartment had been bombed, and there was an Israeli tank unit approaching the building.
What Did the Soldiers Do to the Ambulance Driver and His Ambulance?
The ambulance driver who said he tried to reach the Abed Rabbos seems to be a particularly unreliable source. In one media outlet, he claims Israeli soldiers backed his ambulance into his house, crushing it. In another, he left the scene and returned only to find the ambulance crushed under a demolished building. He also contradicts himself about what the soldiers did to him – did they beat him, order him to strip or just tell him to leave? Samiyeh al-Sheikh cannot get his story straight.
1) Time: The ambulance driver, Samiyeh al-Sheikh, who lives close by, said he heard shots and screams coming from Abed Rabu’s house. “But when I tried to go toward him, the Israeli soldiers beat me up. Then, with a bulldozer, the soldiers backed the ambulance against my house and crushed it like sand.”
2) McClatchy: Samieh al-Sheik, the ambulance driver who lived in an adjacent home, heard the shouting. Without thinking about what could be waiting outside, Sheik said he ran to his ambulance, turned on the emergency lights and drove towards the screams.
As he turned the corner and headed for Abed Rabbo’s home, Sheik said he came face-to-face with the Israeli tank unit. The soldiers ordered him to get out of the ambulance and told him to walk straight out of the neighborhood.
“I didn’t see what happened to the family that day because I couldn’t reach them,” said Sheik, who returned to find the ambulance crushed under a demolished building.
3) Irish Times (Jan. 26): Samih al-Sheikh, an ambulance driver, heard the Abed Rabbos screaming from his home, 60 metres away.
He started up the hill in his ambulance, in uniform, with the intention of helping them, but came upon two Israeli tanks.
“The Israelis told me to get out of my ambulance with my hands up. The made me strip down to my underwear. They wouldn’t let me go to the Abed Rabbos,” he said.
4) In the Independent, Khaled says that an ambulance was held up due to poor road conditions, and says nothing about the army forbidding his neighbor to approach in his ambulance. Macintyre wrote: “Khaled Abed Rabbo said that there had been a delay before the ambulance could reach the building because the road from the west had been made impassable by the churning of the tanks.
The soldiers had in the end let the family leave on foot, he said.
He added that they walked two kilometres before finding a vehicle to take them to Kamal Adwan Hospital.”
Under What Circumstances Was the Family Able to Leave?
The family’s story about whether or not the soldiers permitted them to leave with the wounded and dead vary from article to article. One account says the soldiers allowed them to go with no trouble. Others claim that soldiers refused to let them leave for a couple of hours, and when they finally agreed, shot at the family’s feet (and another account says around their head) as they fled. 1) Sydney Morning Herald: Ahmed, Husam, and another son, Farj, recall that their mother and the three girls were dragged into the house. “When the soldiers realised that two of the girls were dead, they said Khaled could take her to the hospital.” . . . Khaled said the soldiers told him he could take his daughter to the hospital, and he set off on foot with Sammer in his arms.
His wife walked with him, carrying one of the dead girls, and another brother, Ibrahim, carried the second dead girl.
2) Time: For two hours, Abed Rabu says, he was unable to summon help or move from the house. He says he pleaded with the soldiers to let him leave with his injured family, but they refused. Finally, his aged father picked up Samar in his arms and stood in the doorway. He said, “I’m willing to risk my life to take her to the hospital.” This time, Abed Rabu says, the soldiers allowed them out. He and nine family members followed, carrying the two other wounded children and their grandmother. “I couldn’t tell if Suwad and Amal were still breathing, but there was still a chance they might be alive,” says Abed Rabu. “As we walked up the road, the soldiers shot at dirt around our feed.” Abed Rabu says he carried his daughters more than a mile. By the time they reached the hospital, the girls were dead.
3) Irish Times: In separate interviews, Khaled and Souad said the soldiers shot around their feet and over their heads as they were fleeing. Both recounted how a man with a horse-drawn cart who tried to help them was also shot dead.
The claim about the man with the horse-drawn cart does not appear elsewhere.
Who Carried Whom?
In another detail which does not check up from story to story, Khaled is not consistent about which family member carried which daughter as they walked to the hospital. Even despite his trauma, you would think that Khaled would be able to recall whether he was carrying for two kilometers his critically injured child who ultimately survived or a child that was killed.
1) Sydney Morning Herald: Khaled said the soldiers told him he could take his daughter to the hospital, and he set off on foot with Sammer in his arms. His wife walked with him, carrying one of the dead girls, and another brother, Ibrahim, carried the second dead girl.
2) Independent: He said: “I carried Suad, who was dead, my wife carried Amal and my brother Ibrahim carried Samer.” Where Was the Tank?
1) Time: . . . Israeli tanks churned across the strawberry fields and knocked their way into a little park about 20 yards (18 m) from the family home.
2) Nissenbaum: When they opened the door, they saw an Israeli tank parked in their garden about 10 yards away. What Do Palestinian Sources Say about the Abed Rabbo Sisters?
According to the Palestinian Ma’an News Agency, the Abed Rabbo girls were not shot dead in cold blood as they wave white flags. Rather, the day of the incident, on Jan. 7 the agency reported, under the headline "Airstrike kills three sisters during supposed lull":
Israeli warplanes killed three Palestinian civilians on Wednesday afternoon during what Israel had earlier declared to be a unilateral three hour halt in its attacks on Gaza. . . .
Medics at Kamal Udwan Hospital confirmed that three sisters were killed by Israeli fire in the east of Jabaliya Refugee Camp. The sisters were identified as two-year-old Amal, four year-old Su’ad and six-year-old Samar. Others were injured, medics said.
Likewise, Palestinian Satellite Channel TV from Ramallah reported on Jan. 7:
The Israeli shelling of the northern strip has been renewed after the end of the three-hour truce announced by the occupation forces at noon. However, Israeli warplanes continued intensive overflights of Gaza. The sources noted that the Israeli warplanes carried out four air strikes on areas in northern Gaza. The sources added that the occupation’s planes bombarded areas in Jabaliyah, causing the martyrdom of three sisters. (Translated by BBC World Monitoring)
In yet another version of events, Palestinian medical officials told the Los Angeles Times that the girls were killed by a tank shell:
Palestinian medical officials said three sisters from the Abed Rabbu family – Suad, 6; Amal, 4; and Samar, 2 – were killed by an Israeli tank shell in Jabaliya.
Ha’aretz likewise reported:
The war returned in the evening. Electricity went out, and the water supply was disrupted. An artillery shell struck the Abed Rabbo home in the northeast Strip, killing three girls, aged 2, 4 and 6.
(Strangely, all of the accounts which attribute the deaths to either air strikes or tank artillery — and not to a cold blooded execution — state that three sisters, not two, were killed.)
Hamas Activity in the Area Tim McGirk of Time briefly visits the question of Hamas activity in the area, reporting:
Whether the troops believed they were under threat when they opened fire is unclear. Most residents of Jebel al-Kashif claim there were no Hamas fighters in the area of the time of the alleged incident, but a middle-aged farmer in a battered army jacket took me aside and said, in a near whisper, that Hamas had been firing rockets from the vicinity of where the episode took place.
Had McGirk done some further digging on this point he might have found the Jan. 27, 2009 report about Izbet Abed Rabbo, home for the Abed Rabbo family, from the Palestinian newspaper, Al-Hayat Al-Jadida, which carried this critical report Jan. 27, 2009 (translated by Palestinian Media Watch):
The Abd Rabbo family kept quiet while Hamas fighters turned their farm in the Gaza Strip into a fortress. Right now they are waiting for the aid promised by the [Hamas] movement after Israel bombed the farm and turned it into ruins. . .
The hill on which Abd Rabbo family lives overlooks the Israeli town Sderot, a fact that turned it into an ideal military position for the Palestinian fighters, from which they have launched hundreds of rockets into southern Israel during the last few years. Several of the Abd Rabbo family members described how the fighters dug tunnels under their houses, stored arms in the fields and launched rockets from the yard of their farm during the nights.
The Abd Rabbo family members emphasize that they are not [Hamas] activists and that they are still loyal to the Fatah movement, but that they were unable to prevent the armed squads from entering their neighborhood at night. One family member, Hadi (age 22) said: “You can’t say anything to the resistance [fighters], or they will accuse you of collaborating [with Israel] and shoot you in the legs.”
Given the long list of Gazans wounded and even executed by Hamas, it’s no wonder that the Abed Rabbo clan is not forthcoming with information about the tunnels and rockets in their midst. And, given the fact that homes in the area were used as weapons depots (against the will of the owners), it is possible that the Abed Rabbo girls were killed by secondary explosions of Hamas munitions. In which case, there’s good reason for the Abed Rabbos, who await reparations from Hamas, to tell the white flag story. It's certainly much safer. Western journalists and human rights investigators won't break their legs.
---
"Yes, I do compare the Nazi killing of Jews with the Israeli killings of Palestinians, and of Rachel Corrie." [...] "I am a better Jew than you"
Norman's mentality in a nutshell. What an embarrassing clown and fascist racist.
Norman, who you are or what you pretend to be is unimportant. What is clear is your agenda.I would be very interested to have you list for me any conflict in human history, especially one with the intensity and hate attached to the Arab-Israeli conflict, that did not involve the deaths of civilians.Let's narrow the scope and just list those conflicts that involved one party that, as do the arab, use civilian areas to launch attacks from and to shield themselves from retaliation. Just in the past few decades alone we have seen atrocities against civilian populations throughout Asia and Africa and South America which count the victims in the millions. Of course, for the world's Liberal-Far Leftists and their anti-Semitic fellow travelers, these true atrocities are of little concern. When you're infected with OCIHS(Obsessive Compulsive Israel Hating Syndrome) the rest of the world doesn't exist: it's all about Israel.
The shelf life of an "art-house" film is short, but the Toronto controversy should call attention to the startlingly original Israeli (Hebrew language) animated feature film from 2008, "Waltz with Bashir."
Among dozens of international awards and nominations, it was nominated for a "Best Foreign Language Film" Oscar and won the Golden Globe for the same category.
"Waltz with Bashir" concerns recurrent dreams/nightmares and "recovered memories" of Israeli Army veterans who were witnesses to the Sabra and Shatila massacres during the Israeli occupation of southern Lebanon in 1982.
The writer and director, Ari Folman, was a 19-year-old IDF soldier during the events in Lebanon depicted in "Waltz with Bashir." The film is an anime-style reconstruction of the memories, dreams and witness of aging IDF veterans who served in the Lebanon operation.
The Bashir of the title is the president-elect of Lebanon, Bashir Gemayel, who was assassinated in 1982.
Israeli films are routinely banned by the Lebanese government, but Lebanese bloggers manaaged to arrange a private screening of "Waltz with Bashir" in Beirut in January 2009. Folman's reaction:
"I was overwhelmed and excited. I wish I could have been there. I wish one day I'll be able to present the film myself in Beirut. For me, it will be the happiest day of my life."
You'd have a better 'claim' to being a 'better' anything if you realized the only people responsible for those dead children are the islamic fascists who intentionally use children as cover, who choose to fight in civilian areas and who send them off as jihadi martyrs to gain allah's reward in Paradise.
Israel defense chief: Iran not an existential threat Thu Sep 17, 2009
"JERUSALEM (Reuters) - Israeli Defense Minister Ehud Barak was quoted on Thursday as saying he does not view Iran as a threat to the existence of the Jewish state, a view that would seem to depart from Israeli statements of the recent past.
Israel's mass-circulation Yedioth Ahronoth daily quoted Barak, the head of Israel's center-left Labour party, as saying "Iran does not constitute an existential threat against Israel."
In response to a question about Tehran's nuclear programme which Israel has said it sees as destined to produce atomic weapons that could put its existence at risk, Barak said in an interview with the paper:
"I am not among those who believe Iran is an existential issue for Israel." [ . . . . ]
Hollyweird actors, directors,producers et al. are for the most part "B-rated" at best.Too much illicit drugs in their veins & Brains. Their political opinions, just like their "B-rated" movies are not even worth the paper it's written on. Left-wingers are also actors in the political scene. "B-rated" at best. Their entire raison d'etre is to critisize Israel exclusively, thus achieving political nirvana in their distorted mind. Every other political injustice in the world, and there are many, is rarely and fleetingly mentioned. So one may get the false impression that the state of Israel is the sole pariah in the entire world. Well, some of us are still philo-semites, pro-Israel, and civilized. The reason is that ultimately, in a hypothetical test, most civilized persons would much rather live under Israeli democray than any of the barbaric moslem countries anywhere on planet earth. Except "B-rated" actors & leftwingers...
Are folks posting here aware of how heavily it is censored? Or that it is even censored? And in favor of the PC Jewish left view? One "Grif" made some comments about me in his posting on the list. I responded directly to them.
Not only are Grif's comments about me and my post (in essence: "all hat and no cattle") removed, but my response has also been eradicated!
Without any notice whatsoever, I might add.
This is absolutely wrong, despite your sentence about "vigorous debate and reasoned critique are welcomed, name calling and personal invective are not" I might ask, who on earth are YOU - an unseen, invisible 'moderator' - to decide? Yes, you certainly "reserve the right to remove comments for any reason", but that should exercised once in a blue moon. What you've done here is rewrite history - much like the Goldstone report itself.
Lbnaz,
"Were you there? How do you know Rachel Corrie was defending a house when she was killed?"
I see, I need to be an eyewitness but Lbnaz does not. This opens a real can of worms. I guess no knowledge exists unless witnessed first hand by whoever cites it. I guess now we cannot rely on the relaity of the Civil War and the existence of the Roman Empire now that all 1st hand witnesses are dead. and what of you, where you there?
"Without having witnessed the event yourself is it your contention that the ISM members were telling the "truth" and the Judge Advocate's Office of the IDF "lying"? And if so, why is that?"
Yes I do, but first of all, I note no charges of the house belonging to a terrorist, but now the bulldozer was innocently clearing brush when for some strange reason Corrie leaps in front of the machine before the driver could see her. One should note there exists online a series of photos taken of the incident where Rachel is in clear view of the driver. In fact one of which shows them looking directly at each other. The IDF has been lying so many times it seems their first response to anything.
"The Committee of Palestinian Israeli intellectuals who drew up a platform detailing what they perceived to be the implementation of a "state of all its citizens policy" said inter alia that for Israel to meet their requirements it must forego all symbols of state and state education practices that express identification with the Jewish people or Jewish religion including Israel's anthem, flag, state holidays and memorial days, school curriculums etc."
You are being sly again. This gross overstatement alludes to their objections to Israel's policy of forcing such a curriculum on Palestinian students, which Israel continues to do thus excluding Palestinian presence, culture, and history entirely. Again, the imperatives of the Jewish State.
"And if attaining the status of "a state of all its citizens" is desirable, then why should Israel which only came into existence in 1948, be the first state before all the other states that were established before 1948 which have no intention to stop identifying with and (where called for) disestablishing themselves from whatever religion, church, or Christian denomination that they currently privilege?"
Again, more silliness. Israel is the only state in existence that demands such adherence to its proclaimed religion/ethnicity/tribe in matters of naturalization and civil liberties. Not even Saudi Arabia or Iran, hardly bastions of freedom, demand adherence to a certain religion as a prerequisite for citizenship. Nor is there any other state that assumes automatic citizenship of all who adhere to such or to a certain ethnicity.
"grif have you reached the conclusion that the deal offered Arafat was "unacceptable" on the PLO's PR, the maps Jimmy Carter plagiarized from Dennis Ross and altered for his book Peace not Apartheid, or on the student intern Clayton Swisher who never sat in on a single negotiating session at Oslo but wrote a book about Oslo anyways? Or was it "unacceptable" because Israel didn't agree to an unfettered ability for any UNRWA client, or Palestinian living outside of Israel to claim property and citizenship in Israel and because Israel didn't agree to meet Arafat and Abu Mazen's demand to place the Wailing Wall under Palestinian sovereignty?"
This is merely cockeyed and bizarre. Read Malley who was there alongside Ross, and I'm not talking about Oslo. There are plenty of other sources as well, you can find them for yourself. Just Google for myths of Camp David, or myths of Barack's generous offer, etc. None of what you list under the last sentence is based in fact.
Nice quote from Orwell. I'm quite familiar with it. He was referring specifically to the Stalinist Left after the Soviet-Nazi agreement. What this has to do with Israel is anyone's guess. Oddly enough, in 1937 Orwell himself had taken the very same stance he argues against in your quote, which was that a war against Germany would be another "Imperialist war." You can find it in Hitchens', "Why Orwell Matters." His ranting against pacifists is just silly and ahistorical. It should also be pointed out that his railing against pacifists was tempered in 1949 in "Reflections on Gandhi," where he wrote admiringly of Gandhi's courage and theories of nonviolent resistance.
It is also worth arguing how many Jewish lives would have been saved if they had been able to organize around methods of nonviolent resistance. Events in Bulgaria, Italy, and in the Rosenstrasse protests indicate the possibilities of some success. In any case, in the actual event, it would have been worth trying.
On your last point concerning what is allowed into Gaza and the WB, it is you who knows little. Try reading Haaretz, the JPost, or any other newspaper of note. They all contain reports of what is allowed in and what is not, and how such affects the Palestinians. Your bald denial of what is plain to read everywhere does not make it so.
Say, Grif, since you claim to be so well read and informed why haven't you commented about the censorship of your posts and mine on this board?
Either way, you appear more than a tad ill informed. Your remark about "methods of nonviolent resistance" is utterly inapplicable and - I'm sorry to say - inexcusable. Are you a Jew? If so I suggest a bit more reading about the Shoah. The brutality and torture of the Jewish population by the Germans was implemented in demonic graduated steps, each one of which was deceptive in nature. Possible resistance leaders were either slain right from the start or coopted through threats to the family.
Israel has the right people in charge now. I pray wholeheartedly that the deluded Left never regains popular support or power.
For those who want to learn for themselves the largely unheralded story of active resistance during the Shoah I strongly recommend the three volume ANTHOLOGY ON ARMED JEWISH RESISTANCE 1939 - 1945, complied and edited by Isaac Kowalski. The Foreward was written by Tuvia Bielski.
During these endarkened days it's absolutely vital not to fooled by "progressive" preachers of cowardice, suicidal "compromises", and defeat. Defeating genocidal enemies means armed combat, whether against Goliath or Hamas!
Hymie, I agree with your every word. Thank you! It's just plain common sense, rather hard to find among the "J-Street generation" of Twittering, Facebooking boys and girls ...
Tex,
I did comment about the censorship but my comment on censorship was censored.
And please do not deign to lecture me about the Holocaust, I have read volumes on it and I am quite familiar with the history, thank you. But perhaps you might need a brush-up.
As you commented, but without much apparent thought: "The brutality and torture of the Jewish population by the Germans was implemented in demonic graduated steps, each one of which was deceptive in nature."
There was nothing deceptive in the majority of steps. What is deceptive in throwing Jews out of classrooms and universities? Of forcing them to wear yellow stars? Of the curtailment of employment, and all the other many initial steps denying Jews and other so-called "untermensch" their civil liberties? The answer is absolutely nothing. Yet the final truly deceptive step depended on all the previous ones. There were plenty of opportunities for noncompliance well before the transports for the denial of their human rights was open and plain for all to see.
Jewish leadership counseled compliance with these initial steps which one by one completely isolated Jews in the belief that doing so would ultimately be to their benefit. Did they know what awaited them? Of course not. But even when they did many of the Judenrat continued to counsel compliance and not resistance, of either the violent or non-violent sort, in the sorry belief they were trading some lives for the possibility of others. Have you forgotten the story of Rudolf Kastner and the Hungarian Jews? Kastner, a Zionist official, knew exactly their fate, refused to tell them in the mistaken belief it would only cause more suffering. He testified to this at the libel trial against Grunewald.
My small point was that in limited efforts we saw the efficacy of noncompliance. In Bulgaria 50,000 Bulgarian Jews were saved when the Bulgarian officials simply shined-on the Nazis and did nothing. In Italy, the overwhelming majority of Italian Jews were saved by the Italians simply refusing to comply, which infuriated the Germans and led to Mussolini simply shrugging his shoulders. In the Italian zone of occupied France the Germans demanded the Jews be thrown from their homes. The Italians moved them to hotels. They blocked every move they could. After the fall of Mussolini in 1943 the Italian Navy was steaming toward France to evacuate the Jews in their zone, but the Germans got there first. The Italian Jews that were sent to the camps were transported only after the German occupation and in the midst of a civil war. The Rosenstrasse demonstrations showed that even in Germany Jews could be saved by shows of public disapproval.
So what are you arguing? That everyone should have complied with the Nazis? That noncompliance should not have been attempted at all?
If non-violent resistance and noncompliance carried out on a wider basis from the very start saved only a handful of Jews and others would it not have been worth the effort? In fact, even if it saved no Jews at all would it not have been better than the compliance counseled by the Judenrat?
I, for one, would have argued for resistance by any means possible from the very start (well before the transports), including non-violent resistance and non-compliance. I am surprised that you would not.
One commentor wrote that California (I am a Californian) stole Mexican land and compared it to Israel's occupation of the W. Bk, etc.
First of all, the Arabs stole JEWISH land, paid for by Jews over decades. This entire land area, from the Med. to Iraq, was intended as a Jewish homeland (read the Balfour Declaration). Jordan is the only Palestinian land, and even that country was arbitrarily taken away from the Jews.
ANYONE who knows history, knows that the Arabs attacked the small Jewish state just created, per the UN partition. They have murdered Israelis, since, to throw the Jews into the sea (their own statements). Both Hezbollah and Hamas state repeated their goals.
From 1956 to the present, they have spared no effort to accomplish , a M.E. Judenrein (w/o Jews). They want to destroy every vestige of not only Israel, but Jewish culture.
Israel has had to deal with these barbarians and murderers for 60 years. It's latest and most dangerous enemy is now Iran, with it's supporters. I am convinced Israel is prepared to deal with any Iranian threat.
911 was the result of Saudis, yet Jews are still blamed in the Muslim world. Al Qaeda is excused as just retaliating for US support of Israel. (If Israel attacked Saudi Arabia for supporting the Palestinians, would thinking be similar as to who to blame?).
Even though Jane (Hanoi Jane) Fonda signed the letter and later retracted...I will never, never see her movies, buy her books or in any other way support her. Two can play the same game. The damage is already done.
But I am also dismayed that Israeli artists would be critical of Israeli policy. Given their druthers, and a successful Jihad, these artists would be the first to feel the swift swords of the Arabs ( similar to Daniel Pearl). Israel needs a commission all right, to investigate sedition.
The Arabs started every war, the goal of which was to drive the Jews into the sea.
They deserve NOTHING from Israel, certainly not from a Jew or right thinking Christian.
This is not a game folks. Today a film festival, tomorrow what, rockets fired into Tel Aviv? Will Hollywood be next on the list to boycott?
I find it most amusing that Daniel Barenboim, who has to be the most gullible and naive Jew on the planet, is favored by the Palestinians. I mean why Wagner, knowing how many Holocaust survivers are in Israel? Why not Mozart?
When will Jewish businesses be boycotted and Jewish shops be targeted?
Give them a finger and they will eventually take the entire body. That is why we must always fight similar boycotts..and not give them one inch.
Israel's fight is our fight. If not there, we will fight the Muslims here. Take my word for it. Every captured terrorist operating in the US had Jewish targets. Read the FBI reports.
Anti-Semitism, anti-Judaism and anti-Zionist are all the same, the eradication of the Jewish people.
Don't believe me, ask Ahmad.
I think the protest letter is great.
I noticed Howard Zinn on that list. A People's History of the United States (1492-Present) is a great book, it contains a lot of what is missing from grade school U.S. History classes in the U.S.