Archive for the ‘articles’ Category

IF IT’S NOT GENOCIDE, WHAT WORD SHOULD WE USE?

July 25, 2017

By  on June 30, 2017

 

I TAKE ISSUE with the Jewish Currents editorial, “Supporting the Black Lives Matter Platform, Its Slander of Israel Notwithstanding” (Autumn, 2016), in which the magazine unfortunately joined the pack of the hands-in-the-air-I’m–shocked-and-horrified Zionist groups that condemned the Movement for Black Lives — a very large coalition of which Black Lives Matter is one organization — for using the words “genocide” and “apartheid” in relation to Israel’s policies toward the Palestinian people.

The editorial acknowledges agreement with several of the points raised by this prodigious platform statement, and expresses the hope that liberal Jewish groups will not be turned off by it. However, at the same time, the editorial goes to considerable lengths to disparage the platform, by using, in addition to “slander,” such language as “self-important jargon,” “an affront,” and “posturing.” It ends with a gratuitous patronizing remark (not much appreciated by the Black community,  surely) that the “#Black Lives Matter movement would be well advised to follow the example of Dr. King. . .” (my italics).

Since the Movement for Black Lives is, in my opinion, one of the most important coalitions to arise in decades, what JC says about it is correspondingly important. In this response, I am not dealing primarily with the word “apartheid” as it relates to Israel, since by now it has wide currency, ranging from statements by Archbishop Desmond Tutu and rock stars to UN conventions and reports by B’tselem, the well-respected Israeli human rights group, that as long ago as 2004 declared Israel’s road policy to be an apartheid practice.

Let me deal, instead, with the word in the platform that caused the commotion: “genocide.” First of all, let’s go to what the platform says, under the heading Invest-Divest:

The US justifies and advances the global war on terror via its alliance with Israel and is complicit in the genocide taking place against the Palestinian people. The US requires Israel to use 75 percent of all the military aid it receives to buy US-made arms. Consequently, every year billions of dollars are funneled from US taxpayers to hundreds of arms corporations, who then wage lobbying campaigns pushing for even more foreign military aid. The results of this policy are twofold: it not only diverts much needed funding from domestic education and social programs, but it makes US citizens complicit in the abuses committed by the Israeli government. Israel is an apartheid state with over 50 laws on the books that sanction discrimination against the Palestinian people. Palestinian homes and land are routinely bulldozed to make way for illegal Israeli settlements. Israeli soldiers also regularly arrest and detain Palestinians as young as 4 years old without due process. Every day, Palestinians are forced to walk through military checkpoints along the US-funded apartheid wall.

NOW, FOR SOME BACKGROUND:

Some of your readers may know that the Black community has had a long and tormented relationship with this word, “genocide.” In 1946, a year after the end of World War II, the National Negro Congress petitioned the United Nations for help in dealing with systemic racial discrimination in the U.S.  The NAACP followed suit in 1947, with its “Appeal to the World,” similarly urging redress, written by Dr. W. E. B. DuBois and two other Black scholars and lawyers. The UN did not respond.

On December 9, 1948, the UN approved the Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide.  What the Convention actually says is:

Article 1

The Contracting Parties confirm that genocide, whether committed in time of peace or in time of war, is a crime under international law which they undertake to prevent and to punish.

Article 2

In the present Convention, genocide means any of the following acts committed with intent to destroy, in whole or in part, a national, ethnical, racial or religious group, as such:

a) killing members of the group;

b) causing serious bodily or mental harm to members of the group;

c) deliberately inflicting on the group conditions of life calculated to bring about its physical destruction in whole or in part; and

d) imposing measures intended to prevent births within the group.

e) forcibly transferring children of the group to another group.

Article 3:

The following acts shall be punishable:

a) genocide;

b) conspiracy to commit genocide;

c) direct and public incitement to commit genocide;

d) attempt to commit genocide;

e) complicity in genocide.

In 1951, Paul Robeson and William L. Patterson, head of the Civil Rights Congress, presented the 100-page, flawlessly documented petition, “We Charge Genocide,” to the UN, seeking justice for African Americans using the convention it had so recently approved (as pictured at the top of this article).  Patterson, a master of impassioned prose, described the misery suffered by the Black population in the U.S. in the introduction to “We Charge Genocide”:

Out of the inhuman black ghettos of American cities, out of the cotton plantations of the South, comes this record of mass slayings on the basis of race, of lives deliberately warped and distorted by the willful creation of conditions making for premature death, poverty and disease . . .

Patterson offered important clarifications:

It is sometimes incorrectly thought that genocide means the complete and definitive destruction of a race or people. However, the Genocide Convention . . . defines genocide as any killings on the basis of race, or, in its specific words, as “killing members of the group.” Any intent to destroy, in whole or in part, a national, racial, ethic or religious group is genocide, according to the convention.

Needless to say (or perhaps it is not needless?), these giants of the Black community got nowhere with these efforts. In fact, for their trouble, the U.S. government seized the passports of Robeson and Patterson, who were then unable to travel outside the U.S. for several years, and subjected them to a host of other punishments. (The U.S. government lifted DuBois’ passport in 1951 for other reasons.)

At the time — the near-height of McCarthyism, let us not forget — there was little support for the idea that Black people could claim to be victims of genocide.  The press, by and large, ignored “We Charge Genocide.” However, I.F. Stone, the independent American journalist, was favorably disposed.  And so was . . . drumroll . . . none other than Jewish Currents, in its original incarnation, Jewish Life.

ACCORDING TO Jewish Currents’ Sid Resnick Archives, not only did Jewish Life reprint a speech from Patterson (January, 1952) about “We Charge Genocide,” it used the word in the headline of an article (“Genocide in Florida,” February, 1952) and it editorialized (February, 1952) as follows:

While recognizing this common enemy [racism and fascism], it is a disservice to fail to grasp that the situations of the Negro and Jewish peoples in this country are qualitatively different. There is a tendency to make careless and superficial parallels of the situation of the two peoples. Such comparisons obscure the fact that the Negro people, as a people, are subjected to second class citizenship and Jim Crow so as to enforce on the whole Negro people unrelieved oppression that adds up to genocide.

It should come as no surprise that the Movement for Black Lives would choose to apply this particular word, since it has lived in the DNA of the Black community for nearly sixty-six years. For example, Dr. Joy James reflected in 2009 in her article, “The Dead Zone: Stumbling at the Crossroads of Party Politics, Genocide, and Postracial Racism,” on the “absence of analysis engaging antiblack racism and genocide in Western democracies,” and commented:

Harvard scholars have published tracts on the word nigger, tracing the etymology and reflecting on emotional connotations.  Yet genocide, which has a much more fearful impact on national consciousness and material well-being, is less rigorously analyzed as part of the black condition . . . For those who disdain or refuse the term genocide, despite the compatibility of black conditions with the standards of the UN Convention on the Prevention and Elimination of Genocide, one must ask, ‘What language would you use?’”

Now to the merits of the case. Can the word be used by Black people to describe themselves?  Can the word be used by Black people to describe others? Is the word accurate?

There are actually well-respected entities that agree that the State of Israel is guilty of genocide. Chief among them is the Center for Constitutional Rights (CCR), which issued a paper in August, 2016 that quoted Martin Shaw, a scholar of genocide, who wrote in his article, “Palestine in an International Historical Perspective on Genocide” [Holy Land Studies, 2010]: “Genocidal action aims not just to contain, control or subordinate a population, but to shatter and break up its social existence.  Thus genocide is defined, not by a particular form of violence, but by general and pervasive violence.”

The CCR paper said that “While there has been recent criticism of those taking the position that Israel is committing genocide against Palestinians, there is a long history of human rights scholarship and legal analysis that supports the assertion.” CCR concluded that

the killings of Palestinians and their forceful expulsion from mandate Palestine in 1948, the Israeli occupation of the West Bank, East Jerusalem, and Gaza, and the violence and discrimination directed at Palestinians by the Israeli government have violated a number of human rights protections contained in international human rights law, genocide being among them.

Finally, though your editorial describes the reaction to the statement’s use of the word from many organizations (the Zionist Organization ofAmerica, the Anti-Defamation League, Tru’ah, the movement for Reform Judaism, and J Street), for some unfathomable reason you neglect to say one word about Jewish Voice for Peace (JVP), the fastest-growing Jewish organization on the left, which now has 225,000 people on its list and sixty-five chapters throughout the country.  Within a matter of days, JVP went publicly on record endorsing the BLM position paper “without reservation.”

TIME FOR FULL disclosure: I know only too well that the word “genocide” is controversial (to say the least), and I also know that some people on the left whom I respect — people who support the Movement for Black Lives and who do feel that Israel has violated countless international human rights standards — think the word has become too broad. I confess that I myself probably would have hesitated to use the word for another reason: after fourteen years in the Israel/Palestine movement (and several trips to Israel, the West Bank, and Gaza), I knew only too well what was going to happen. Here at home I have been called everything you can imagine — by people in our community who would not know a thoughtful dialogue if they fell over it — because I’ve witnessed and felt and spoken about the problems cited by the MBL statement and CCR.

But after hesitating, I looked up the actual words in the Convention and did some research, especially about how some in the Black community have viewed genocide, and came to see that  I was wrong and these young Black activists were right. They tried to get people to think.  They thought it was worth it.  They were brave and they paid the price. If readers want to know their reaction, they can see Rachel Gilmer, one of the named authors of the Invest-Divest section of the Movement for Black Lives’s position paper, talk about it at jewishvoiceforpeace.org/galleries/nmm-2017-virtual-access.

To sum up: Echoing Dr. James, if the situation of the Palestinians under Israeli control is not genocide, what is it?

We have to begin having some serious conversations, everybody.

 Dorothy M. Zellner, a longtime civil rights and Israel/Palestine activist, has written regularly for Jewish Currents and is one of JC’s volunteer production assistants.

Advertisements

Finding the Inspiration to Stand Up for Each Other: An Interview With Sister Aisha al-Adawiya

July 25, 2017
Saturday, July 22, 2017By Donna Nevel, Truthout 
   Community leader Aisha al-Adawiya (known as Sister Aisha) embodies a life grounded in a profound commitment to pursuing justice, social transformation and deep, meaningful relationships. I met Sister Aisha many years ago during the struggle to save the Khalil Gibran International Academy, the first Arabic-English dual language public school in New York City. I was drawn to Sister Aisha’s beautiful energy and spirit and soon realized that many of the women I was organizing with from within Muslim communities looked up to her deeply as a mentor, role model and inspiration, and that this was true of partners from other communities, like myself, as well. Given the challenging moment we are in, I wanted to interview Sister Aisha to learn from her wisdom and her generous self.

Born and raised in Alabama, Sister Aisha came to New York in the early 1960s right after high school to pursue a singing career. She was raised in the Black church and sang in her church choir. Describing herself in those years as “a free spirit,” she lived in Greenwich Village until moving to Harlem. Seeking a spiritual home, she said that “Islam found me” in 1972. She encountered Malcolm X, “was blown away by him, and began my education as it were. Malcolm X continues to be my mentor.” She has worked for more than 30 years at the Schomburg Center for Research in Black Culture in Harlem and is currently the administrator of its Scholars-in-Residence Program. She recounted how the founder of the Schomburg Center began collecting documents because he was told by a teacher that Black people didn’t have any history — a history, she said, that she also hadn’t known growing up. 

Sister Aisha founded Women in Islam, Inc. in 1992 to bring the voices of Muslim women into critical community discussions that were local, domestic and global in scope. The organization was born soon after the story broke about rape camps in Bosnia. Sister Aisha began to speak out about what was going on and said that, at some point, she was challenged. “Here you are, an African American woman showing up for Bosnians. What does that have to do with you? I was compelled to speak out after hearing about women being herded into rape camps. And the majority of the women being victimized were Muslim.”  She realized that, because there weren’t visible voices from Muslim women on this issue, “I felt the need to construct something that would enable us to engage in this conversation, and to do what we continue to do.” Women in Islam, Inc. has, since its inception, stood up for Muslim women, been a space for Muslim women to discuss who they are and the role of women in Islam, and engaged collectively in the struggle for human rights and social justice.

The first thing Sister Aisha said to me was, “One woman does not make a movement.” That really does capture her humility and belief system.

Reflecting on the current moment, Sister Aisha spoke about how busy we all are right now. But she is concerned that “a lot of us are in reactionary mode. It’s not going to end if we spend our energy and resources just reacting.” Thinking about how to move forward in a different way, she said, “I’m reminded of the Black arts movement and all those … people who were just brilliant and awe-inspiring and how they really fed us and people in the movement through their art. Art may be our last frontier here,” she added. “How do we get back to that? How do we re-engage the arts so that we can have deep expression coming from artists and artistic creativity as we continue to speak truth to power?”

Pausing for a moment, she said, “I’m really trying to reorient myself to the more artistic side of my brain.”

She then spoke about the commonalities in the different struggles for justice. “We are all struggling on so many fronts with few resources except for our will and commitment to what we think is right. More and more of us — and I see it happening so much now in the Muslim community — are recognizing the importance and power of coming together and joining efforts with one another and across our communities. It’s about much more than being an ally. It’s about being family.”

She began speaking about the young man, Micah David-Cole Fletcher, who survived in Portland after being one of three men attacked by a white supremacist when they tried to stop his racist tirade against two teenagers, one of whom was wearing a hijab and one of whom was Black. The other two men who were attacked, Ricky John Best and Taliesin Myrddin Namkai-Meche, didn’t survive. “Look at how this young man took it upon himself to say what he did about the two young girls who were assaulted — that we should be focusing on them and not on him. From his hospital bed, he was holding up his thumb. You could feel his indomitable spirit. That is much more than allyship. That is way beyond solidarity. This is humanity here.”

She paused before speaking more about what we can learn from Micah’s experience. “How do we harness that? That is an inspiration for anybody and everybody who wants to look for hope in any direction.” And then she spoke for a moment about her own role. “How can I support that in any way, and help cultivate that in ourselves and the younger generation? I’m thinking about that a lot.”

“I’m really in awe of this young man and of those people who are just there to stand up. I’m speechless, really. This is exactly where I believe we need to move as human beings. Standing up for each other in a real authentic way. No cameras rolling. Just the human spirit calling on us to say, ‘This is not right and I have to say something’.”

Clearly profoundly moved, she continued to talk about what had happened in Portland. “These two men lost their lives doing that, and this young man who survived, he shined the light back on those girls. How can you — how can we — inspire that sort of commitment? I don’t think they had a choice. They just knew they had to do it.”

Speaking about our challenges at this particular moment, Sister Aisha said she thinks that “the work is much the same, but I do think we need to try to find new tools. For example, I want to dig deeper, more spiritually. I think about Native American cultures and communities a lot. Theirs is a history and reality that often gets ignored or minimized. Yet, we have so much to learn from them and their experience. This is where my spirit is moving me. When we talk about interfaith work, we have to remember that there is a whole world of people with deep spiritual connections, including those who may not adhere to a formal religion, but are committed to human dignity.”

At the end of our conversation, Sister Aisha spoke about our needing to think more about ways to bring our whole political and spiritual and artistic selves into the different facets of our work. “We need to create platforms for people in our communities to express themselves when they have something they want to say. They need to know their voices matter and that they have something to contribute because they are human, because they are part of the human race, because we are all part of humanity together.”

While it is, of course, true that no one person makes a movement, Sister Aisha’s wisdom, grace, compassion and kindness have powerfully impacted so many of us and our movements. She is a leader and visionary we all hold dear.

Copyright, Truthout. May not be reprinted without permission.

DONNA NEVEL, a community psychologist and educator, is a coordinator of PARCEO, a participatory research center. She is a long-time organizer for justice in Palestine; against Islamophobia and anti-Arab racism; and for justice in public education. She is a founding member of the Network Against Islamophobia, a project of Jewish Voice for Peace, and co-author, with Elly Bulkin, of Islamophobia & Israel (2014).

 

 

(more…)

NYC Protestors Drink Salt Water In Solidarity With Palestinian Hunger Strikers

May 25, 2017

Donna Nevel

Donna NevelCOMMUNITY CONTRIBUTOR

Donna Nevel is a community psychologist, educator, and founding member of the Facing the Nakba project, Jews Say No!, and the Network Against Islamophobia, and was a co-founder of Jews for Racial and Economic Justice.

READ MORE

Jews Say No!, an NYC group I am a part of, and the Grannies Peace Brigade recently participated in the salt water challenge in solidarity with more than 1500 Palestinian hunger strikers, who have entered the 38th day of their strike. The Palestinian prisoners in Israeli jails began the hunger strike on April 17th, and the salt water challenge, a social media campaign to show solidarity with the strikers, began with a call by the son of imprisoned Palestinian leader, Marwan Barghouti.

Thousands of individuals and groups have taken the salt water challenge across the globe in support of the Palestinian prisoners. Numbers of the mothers of the prisoners have also courageously joined the strike in solidarity with their sons. Palestinians have held rallies and called a general strike across the West Bank in support; South African anti-apartheid leaders went on a solidarity strike; and students in the U.S. called for a one day fast in solidarity with the prisoners. Support for the prisoners is widespread. The Israeli government has not only failed to respond adequately, but prisoners have been subjected to harsh treatment and retaliatory measures. As a result, the strike has continued and numbers of prisoners have been taken to medical facilities because of seriously deteriorating health.

The demands put forth by the prisoners are clear, fundamental rights. They include access to medical care; allowing regular family visits; and an end to solitary confinement and administrative detention (imprisonment without charge), flagrant violations of human rights. As Barghouti stated in a recent NY Times op-ed, “Palestinian prisoners and detainees have suffered from torture, inhumane and degrading treatment and medical negligence.” He also wrote that “hunger striking is the most peaceful form of resistance available. It inflicts pain solely on those who participate and on their loved ones, in the hopes that their empty stomachs and their sacrifice will help the message resonate beyond the confines of their dark cells.”

Where is American Jewish community support for the Palestinian prisoners? Where is the call from American Jewish organizations to Israel’s leaders demanding they honor the call from the prisoners for their basic needs and rights. The Israeli government’s appalling treatment of Palestinian prisoners is well-documented. There is simply no rationale for not supporting the rights of the Palestinian prisoners.

The demands of the hunger strikers will hopefully be met soon, but we know that international pressure and support can be critical at moments like this. This is a challenge to the American Jewish community to make our voices heard loud and clear in support of the Palestinian hunger strikers, whose demands are simply a call for dignity and humane treatment.

Read more: http://forward.com/scribe/372922/nyc-protestors-drink-salt-water-in-solidarity-with-palestinian-hunger-strik/

Jews Say No! And Granny Peace Brigade take the #SaltWaterChallenge in solidarity with Palestinian hunger strikers

May 23, 2017

The Salt Water Challenge

Today, there are 6300 Palestinian political prisoners in Israeli prisons; this number includes 300 children and 500 administrative detainees (those imprisoned without charge or trial).

Since April 17, Palestinian Prisoners Day, more than 1500 of these political prisoners have engaged in an open-ended hunger strike. Today is Day #37. These prisoners have refused to eat food, only consuming salt water to maintain their health, until the Israeli government meets their demands for basic human rights as stipulated by the Geneva Convention. Freedom and dignity are universal rights inherent in humanity – to be enjoyed by all human beings.

The demands of these hunger strikers include:

  1. An end to administrative detention
  2. An end to solitary confinement
  3. An end to the denial of family visits
  4. Access to proper medical care and treatment, and
  5. The right to access distance higher education

On Monday, May 22,  Jews Say NO! and the Granny Peace Brigade stood in the rain at Broadway and 96th Street in NYC to join a growing, worldwide, social media campaign – #SaltWaterChallenge – to draw attention to the plight of Palestinian political prisoners. As supporters of these hunger-strikers, we drank salt water to stand in solidarity with those who refuse a life of humiliation.

Now, we challenge you to do the same.

 

 

 

Organizing Against Islamophobia: Reflection And Analysis To Strengthen Our Work

February 1, 2017

Donna Nevel community psychologist and educator

MIAMI PROTEST

Muslim communities and those being targeted by the relentless, ongoing Islamophobic, racist, and xenophobic assaults coming from so many directions are organizing with great integrity, strength, and intention. We know these assaults are not new, but the moment calls for all sorts of resistance. Community-based groups and coalitions like DC Justice for Muslims, housed at the Washington Peace Center, in Washington, DC and Desis Rising Up & Moving (DRUM) in NYC (and many more) are engaging in powerful organizing rooted in years of deep work within their communities.

Those of us who are partners in this work and committed to not remaining silent or complicit are joining efforts that require both immediate responses and long-term planning. Social justice groups, faith communities, and other community members are attending community meetings, joining protests, and participating in actions led by Muslim and other impacted groups.

In addition to participating in day-to-day actions, we know that our own reflection, analysis, and deeper understanding can help strengthen our work. Many of us who are not being targeted can too easily carry Islamophobic assumptions propagated by the media, by our own communities, and in the public sphere. There are several issues that are integral to our discussions, analysis, and organizing: for example, the connections among Islamophobia within the U.S., the “war on terror” and U.S. imperialism, and the ways in which Islamophobia and Israel politics intersect.

Those of us working with the Network Against Islamophobia (NAI), a project of Jewish Voice for Peace (JVP) have spent the past few years creating curricula and resources on Challenging Islamophobia and Racism. These materials are designed to help strengthen our work within our communities and to enable us to be effective, principled, creative, and thoughtful partners in the broader movement for justice.

The curricula and work result from deep relationships, organizing, and learning with many different communities and individuals. NAI is deeply appreciative of the work and inspiration of our partners from Muslim and other communities targeted by Islamophobia and racism, and we honor their leadership and vision.

JVP CHAPTER, SEATTLE

Visit the Network Against Islamophobia to download the curricula and resources.

Letter from a Former Zionist Who Supports Justice for Palestine

April 5, 2016

This is about choosing what’s right. It’s a broader struggle with humanity.

Photo Credit: Shutterstock.com

Speaking as a “former Zionist” is no longer strange. In fact, it’s become quite common within some Jewish circles. Yeah, it goes, I used to be a Zionist—a socialist Zionist; a two state Zionist; a Zionist who believed in giving back the occupied territories from ‘67, etc., etc., etc. But a Zionist. Self-determination for both peoples, two peoples/two states, like that. The Nakba? Didn’t enter into the conversation. Not a mention.

So now there are lots of us (former Zionists, that is) out there. Relieved that we are no longer stuck in this false sense of radicalism. Yeah, it seemed radical at the time—Marxist Zionism. National liberation movement, class struggle. True, it was on Palestinian land, but that fact didn’t enter the equation. Our identities fit the definition of oxymorons.

Gave that up, we say. Went through a process. For some of us, a long, not fun process. Emerged clear-headed, in support of the Palestinian-led movement for justice. For justice. For justice.

But, then, the right of return rears its head. Wait, we say, I support justice for Palestine, I know about the Nakba now. But, but, but, how can we get Israeli Jews to support the right of return? (That’s the first thing we think about.) It’s complicated, we say. It’s complicated. It’s complicated. What if…and what if…and what about…

The Israeli Jewish organization Zochrot addresses the right of return head-on. The right of return, not the I’m-doing-you-a-favor of return. Zochrot points out there’s lots of room in Palestine/Israel for everyone. Equal rights for all. Inroads being made among some Israeli Jews. Among some. Useful work.

But change is inevitable, with or without a gaggle of Israeli Jewish support. The movement grows. And grows. For justice. For justice. Global support for BDS, for ending apartheid, for equal rights for all, for the right to return home.

Oh no! The movement is getting too big, too strong. Huge amounts of money poured into trying to sabotage that growing (and growing more) movement. Accuse everyone, yes, everyone in it of being anti-Semites. Yeah, that should kill it. A temporary set-back for sure, but it won’t come close, not at all, to killing it.

Won’t kill it ‘cause Palestinians world-wide and supporters of justice across the globe are fighting, fighting with integrity, with passion, with compassion, with conviction. Fighting for Justice. Fighting for Justice.

So, yes, more Jews have left our fantasy notions of Zionism far behind, far behind, and joined the growing movement for justice. But let’s not get too self-satisfied. A positive development, for sure, but still lots of unlearning to do among us, within our communities.

Still a sense that the land is “ours” to “give away.”  That we are doing good by supporting Palestine—like when white people think we are doing good by opening up “our” schools to families of color. It’s not just “progressive except Palestine,” by the way. “Progressive except public education” is the same phenomenon. Thinking that we will determine the parameters based on “generosity” when, in fact, those whose right it is to be there will prevail because it is their right (not your/our generosity) making it so. The “facts on the ground” will be exposed for the thievery they were and are.

For those of us who identify as part of a Jewish community (in one form or another), let’s not sit passively by, as so many already aren’t. Let’s do the work in our community(ies) while remembering we’re not the vanguard of the revolution. Let’s continue to participate in the broader struggle with humility. With humility. We have a lot to learn as we do this work together.

Donna Nevel is a community psychologist and educator.

Here’s the paper!!!

February 4, 2016

http://itsnotthetimes.com/

http://www.scribd.com/doc/297836018/NYT-Parody

 

 

Faux New York Times highlights biased coverage on Israel/Palestine

February 3, 2016

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE 

Contact:
Beth Miller | miller.bethavedon@gmail.com 

Donna Nevel | denevel@gmail.com | 917-570-4371

(February 3, 2016)–Ten thousand copies of a special supplement of The New York Times focused on Israel and Palestine were distributed across NYC yesterday, while thousands of on-line versions made their way across the internet. The special supplement, which was a parody, includes such articles as “Congress to Debate US Aid to Israel” and “In the Footsteps of Mandela and King: A Non-Violent Movement Gains Ground Ten Years On,” as well as an editorial, “Our New Editorial Policy: Rethinking Israel-Palestine.” 

Created by members of Jewish Voice for Peace New York (JVP NY) and Jews Say No!, (JSN), two NYC organizations devoted to justice in Palestine and Israel, the paper was created to “point out how biased current reporting is on Israel and Palestine and to show what a paper that was fair and accurate could look like,” according to JSN member Alan Levine, one of the paper’s writers.

“As a leading source for news in the United States and in the world, The New York Times has a responsibility to its readers to provide fair, balanced, and fact-based coverage. Our paper reflects the news that we wish The Times and other papers would report,” says Candace Graff, one of the organizers of the action from JVP NY. “It includes the context and facts too often missing from The New York Times and other U.S. media outlets.”

The articles highlight Israel’s ongoing policies of military occupation, displacement, and oppression, and “facts on the ground,” such as settlement expansion, the rise in settler violence, discriminatory anti-democratic laws targeting Palestinian citizens of Israel, and the increase of right-wing voices in the Knesset.  “These are all subjects that deserve to be covered and reported on,” Graff added. In a nod towards how U.S. policy on Israel might change if the mainstream media reported fairly on the continuing human rights abuses against Palestinians, the paper includes an editorial that calls on Congress to condition further Israeli military aid on compliance with the Leahy Law, which forbids U.S. military aid to foreign units that have committed human rights abuses. 

The two groups will release a brief video about the action tomorrow (2/4) that includes footage of the group distributing the paper on the streets of NYC. Jane Hirschmann, a member of Jews Say No!, and Ben Norton, a writer at Salon who first revealed the creators of the paper, discussed media bias around Israel/Palestine on Democracy Now this morning (2/3). The faux paper’s domain and twitter account were suspended, but can be viewed here and here

Credits:

Editors: Elly Bulkin, Nina Felshin, Donna Nevel, Rosalind Petchesky

Designer, print edition: Sarah Sills

Designer, online edition: Asa Diebolt

Production, Online edition: Talia Baurer

Writers: Gordon Beeferman, Brandon Davis, Naomi Dann, Candace Graff, Alan Levine, Aurora Levins, Morales, Donna Nevel, Rosalind Petchesky, Ellen Ross, Lynn Lopez Salzedo, Carl Schieren, Irene Siegel, Pamela Sporn

Copyeditor: Dorothy Zellner

Videographers: Rona Merrill, Pam Sporn

Media team: Naomi Dann, Beth Miller, Donna Nevel

Distribution coordinators: Candace Graff, Jane Hirschmann

A large group of volunteers distributed the papers across the city.

The New York City chapter of Jewish Voice for Peace is part of a national, grassroots organization inspired by Jewish tradition to work for a just and lasting peace according to principles of human rights, equality, and international law for all the people of Israel and Palestine. Jewish Voice for Peace has over 200,000 online supporters, over 60 chapter, a youth wing, a Rabbinic Council, an Artist Council, and Academic Advisory Council, and an Advisory Board made up of leading U.S. intellectuals and artists. Jews Say No!, based in NYC, engages in community education, street theatre, and organizing, and makes their voices heard within the Jewish community and as partners in the broader movement for justice in Palestine/Israel. 

Progressive Jewish groups make New York Times parody issue

February 3, 2016

Satirical publication, handed out on the street and emailed, condemns the Times’ pro-Israel slant

Progressive Jewish groups make New York Times parody issue to protest newspaper's "biased Israel-Palestine coverage"

“Congress to Debate U.S. Aid to Israel,” reads the front page of the latest edition of The New York Times — or, rather, the latest fake edition of the Times.

Activists from progressive Jewish human rights groups created a very convincing-looking fake edition of The New York Times to protest the leading newspaper’s coverage of Israel.

The parody publication is written from a left-wing, anti-racist, anti-Islamophobic perspective that criticizes Israel’s violations of international law and Palestinian human rights, along with what the groups say is the Times’ failure to adequately address these crimes.

Early Tuesday morning, the activists, under the name The New York Times, sent an email out to reporters across the country titled “NYT Announces New Editorial Policy: Rethinking Our Coverage of Israel-Palestine.” The email included a link to an entire website modeled on the Times’ own site, http://www.NewYorkTimes-IP.com, which the activists created.

Less than 24 hours after the site was made public, on Tuesday evening, it was taken down. It is archived here.

On the “NYT-IP” Twitter account the groups made, activists shared photos of them handing out more than 10,000 copies of a print edition of the paper for free in downtown New York City on Tuesday morning. This Twitter account was also suspended later that evening, but is archived here.

nyt-ip received copy

No group immediately took credit for the action on Tuesday, while reports filled the media.

Jewish Voice for Peace — New York and Jews Say No! informed Salon that they had organized the protest. The former is the local branch of Jewish Voice for Peace, or JVP, an American human rights and social justice organization that challenges the Israeli government’s continued violence against and oppression of the indigenous Palestinian people. Jews Say No! is a New York City-based peace group that, like JVP, protests Israel’s illegal 48-year occupation of the Palestinian territories and periodic heavy bombing of Gaza.

In December, during Hanukkah, both groups organized another campaign — a series of protests across the country condemning Islamophobia, racism, anti-refugee xenophobia and police brutality.

Throughout the past few months, JVP and Jews Say No! meticulously designed the fake four-page New York Times newspaper and website. They assembled more than 20 people and created an editorial team dedicated to creating top-quality, wittily written, fact-checked coverage.

The fake “special edition” issue carries the slogan “All the news we didn’t print,” and blasts the Times for what the activists see as its biased, pro-Israel coverage.

Read more

Conversation – Phil Weiss and Dorothy Zellner

January 6, 2016

Palestinian citizens of Israel hold the key — Zellner

by Philip Weiss  Phil Weiss

Dorothy Zellner is a wise friend; I check in on her every once in a while to ask how she thinks the movement for Palestinian freedom is going in the United States. A founding member of Jews Say No! and a volunteer with Jewish Voice for Peace, Zellner has a substantial track record as an activist. She is a former civil rights worker who went south first in 1960, then spent 10 years working for civil rights organizations. I called her right at new year’s to ask her some questions.

PW: Dorothy, you were in the civil rights movement, and in the women’s movement. You’ve seen social change move from the margins to the mainstream. Do you see that happening now with the Israel/Palestine question?

DZ: I say mostly yes. If you think about the situation in Israel/Palestine even 5, or 6, or 8 years ago, we were really a little tiny tree in the big forest. Now I think we’re closer to the mainstream. I don’t have any documentary evidence for that. I just feel it. You don’t have to explain so many things so many times to people. They know some of the words, they know some of the language. I think we’re closer. I’m finding that if I say that I’m working on Israel/Palestine issues, and the occupation, people don’t look at me like I’m speaking Urdu. They actually understand the words. Now whether they agree is another story.

But being in the mainstream doesn’t mean you’re victorious, it just means that more people know about the situation. And I think more people do. That’s probably due to the incredible growth of organizations like JVP. So we’re closer. But are we there? No. I think we have been overtaken unfortunately by this terrorism craze. That’s probably going to be the case for the next while.

As long as there are these big terrorism episodes, it’s to everyone’s advantage to go with that and forget everything else. It happened not only with Israel/Palestine, but you can even see how the Times played very little attention to the French climate change conference. It was all about Paris. Then it was California day and night.

Probably Netanyahu is going to do his best to try to fold the Palestinians into the general terrorism concern, and I think it’s very important for us to be on our toes about what terrorism is and what terrorism isn’t. Terrorism as I understand it means that extreme violence is perpetrated against civilian populations for a political purpose. By that definition, I don’t believe that the Palestinian movement is a terrorist movement. I don’t care how many 12-year-olds pull knives, that doesn’t make it terrorism. Terrorism is not just the technique; it’s the purpose, it’s the reason. So we have to be very straight in our heads about what’s a terrorist. If we’re not, then everybody becomes a terrorist. And if everybody becomes a terrorist, then nobody is a terrorist.

I think the term “terrorism” still is useful, and our own history as a left movement in this country is that we are staunchly opposed to terrorism. We are trying to unite people and move them forward, not trying to frighten people into the arms of anyone (most likely, the far right). I don’t know how many white people were scalped by Native Americans, you could portray Native Americans as terrorists, but they were fighting for their liberation. And Palestinians are fighting for their liberation.

But Dylann Roof is a terrorist. When he kills 9 black people, he has a political purpose. He thinks he’s organizing white people to oppose the advances of black people by scaring black people. We have to get this straight in our minds. Otherwise we become vulnerable when people say that Palestinians are terrorists– and they’re not. Even when they’re firing the rockets. Politically I don’t think this is a feasible tactic, but I don’t think that’s a case of terrorism. Because they are fighting for their liberation. And that’s different from trying to scare people into doing what you want.

Do changes in the conversation remind you of shifts during civil rights days? Is there a year in the 60s this recalls? The other day Israel’s ministry of education banned a book that portrays a Palestinian man and a Jewish woman having a romance, because it threatens Jewish identity. Can you say what this reminds you of in American history?

I don’t go back to the 60’s for a plan. This is such a deeply racist country that those in power have tried to keep the condition of black people off the stage, in the wings. What happened in the civil rights movement is that SNCC and others invented ways of cutting through media and getting themselves right under your eyeballs. That was the great success of the movement. The tactics and the people who were involved immediately broke through the ordinary conversation. We haven’t been able to do that in the Israel/Palestine movement. Yet.

So I’m not looking at this so much from a civil rights strategy. Rather, the analogy with the civil rights movement might be: what is going to happen in Israel proper, to the 20 percent of the population who are Palestinian citizens of Israel. No matter what happens to the occupation, there is still the question of what happens to those 20 percent.

The Zionists call this the Jewish state, but by any measure, it’s not a Jewish state even now. If you add the foreign nationals who live and work there, whose children were born there, and you add in the long-time Christians who live there also, who operate the churches there, and you add in the many thousands of non-Jewish spouses and relatives of Russians who emigrated to Israel, some people have estimated that it’s almost 30 percent of the population that is non-Jewish.

If you have a so-called Jewish state, and 20 percent are Palestinian citizens of Israel– everyone agrees, the left and the right, everyone agrees on that number– so Palestinian citizens of Israel hold the key and this is going to be interesting to watch what happens there. That’s where the analogy is to the U.S. Because black people in the U.S. from year one were never more than 12 percent.

A state that has 20 percent of its population being second class citizens is not a stable state. And sooner or later something will touch off that population, and it’s going to be extremely interesting to see how the government responds, regardless of what happens to the West Bank. That is one of the contradictions they’re dealing with.

There are other contradictions in Israel too that make it unstable. And that is the contradiction between the religious and the secular. That’s been going on since the state was founded. It’s already made a significant demographic shift inside the country. Jerusalem is now largely religious and Tel Aviv is largely secular.

The third is they’re having difficulty integrating, I use the word advisedly, integrating the Jews of color, like the Ethiopians. There are actually organizations in Israel dedicated to protecting the rights of Ethiopian Jews. So if everything was so hunky dory, how come this group has to have organizations protecting their rights?

In addition to the internal contradictions and the international isolation, what is emerging as a key factor is BDS (Boycott, Divestment and Sanctions). Nobody is scoffing at it anymore. When I was in France recently, I was shocked to learn that it is now illegal to promote BDS there. The issue has gone all the way up through the French courts, and the French courts have said it’s illegal to promote BDS, on grounds that it’s “incitement to hatred.” So the BDS forces are going to the European courts for a ruling, and they don’t know what will happen there, but in the meantime it’s a serious organizational issue, because if you stand in front of a store handing out leaflets you can get arrested and serve time and also be liable to fines. While I was there several groups were discussing this and one of them was the Jewish Union for Peace, which is similar to JVP, and a Jewish part of the anti-occupation movement. They had a long discussion about it, and they are going ahead regardless. This is important. This means that even the legal situation is not going to stop people. I’m sure the other organizations will not be stopped either. A state that is supposed to be for liberte, egalite and fraternite is going to arrest people giving out BDS literature! And those efforts are also being made in the United States. That doesn’t happen when you have a trivial technique. BDS is very important, and it’s growing.

We watch this closely because we’re anti-Zionist Jews. Isn’t it possible Israel is merely approaching a crisis, like the Civil War (!) that will “save the union,” in its case preserve a Jewish state? By contrast, the civil rights movement was nonviolent, largely. What chance do you see of a nonviolent resolution in I/P?

I am still of the belief, that what we are seeing is like the slow motion demolition of a building, it comes down very slowly. The Israel we know and have come to love [chuckle] is coming down.

Now they could have had a Jewish state if they had agreed to a two-state solution maybe 25 years ago. I don’t see that it’s possible now. I just don’t see any way that it’s possible.

The issue is going to be, and has been already– that it’s one state, and what kind of a state it’s going to be. That’s where the struggle is going to go. What kind of state will this be? I am very much in favor of people being safe. I want Jews to be safe in Israel/Palestine, whatever you call it. I want Palestinians to be safe. I want everyone to be safe. But it’s going to be hard to be a nonviolent change.

The Palestinians have been using nonviolent techniques at least since the 80s. The first intifada was largely nonviolent. Because it failed, the second intifada was much more violent. But we can see over the years the protesters—in Budrus, in Bil’in– how they are treated when they are nonviolent. I have seen that with my own eyes.

The world generally has not generated the support for this Palestinian nonviolent movement. And if the world doesn’t support nonviolence, I don’t see what their recourse is. If people here are really serious about nonviolence, they better start supporting people there who are nonviolent, who are out there every week being perfectly nonviolent and getting shot at and tear-gassed by the IDF. That would make a difference. Like J Street, if they want a Jewish state and they want to minimize the possibility of violence, then they had better hurry up and start supporting these Palestinians who are nonviolent.

A bright spot in the future may be the Palestinian citizens of Israel who may be able to constitute a very important force in the country electorally. The fact that there’s a Palestinian list was very very important. If they stay together and if they keep pressure on the Supreme Court, which is a totally weak-kneed jellyfish court, they will be able to use their influence inside the country in a nonviolent way. And again, if you’re really serious about nonviolence, you have to support them.

Israel is sitting on a hotbox. And Adalah in Israel, which is like our NAACP, is not kidding when they say they can show discriminatory 50 laws on the books. In addition, an explosion is building up about housing. Since 1948, Israel has built not one new Palestinian town. Meanwhile they have built hundreds of towns for Jews. Now where do Palestinians live in a state where nothing has been built for them, and when they try to build on their own houses, they are denied permits and their houses are destroyed? So what will happen? You don’t have to be a wizard to figure out that this is an extremely dangerous situation.

So I see Israel sitting on a hotbox of their own making even if there were no West Bank or Gaza.

I am deeply dismayed that the Jewish conversation about these issues is so backward. It’s the most reactionary community around. Am I being too pessimistic or hard on that community? What are the signs of the change among Jews?

You say you’re deeply dismayed by the Jewish conversation. I know that– this comes through in your postings. Sometimes I feel that you’re being a bit too pessimistic. I think you are hard on them, hard on us maybe I should say, but many times I have to say it’s merited. In this country we have a Jewish establishment that’s getting older and older, it’s completely ossified in its thinking, it does not understand what’s happen on the ground. To think seriously that criticism of Israel is anti-Semitic?! That’s totally self deluding. If they think that, they are setting up this firewall against anybody that has criticisms. And they will be the last to know that these changes are happening. Because they can’t see it, they’re in the bubble; and to protect themselves, they are becoming more vicious.

And the Jewish young people, we often don’t hear much from them in the Jewish press, because they’re leaving the established Jewish world. They’re slamming the door. I think that’s a big factor in the changes in the Jewish community. The old part is still very strong, ridiculously strong. But how long they will hold on, I don’t know.

You and three or four other wonderful civil-rights veteran Jews went on that Open Hillel tour of campuses last spring. These are people who should have been welcomed into every goddamn synagogue in the country to celebrate what they represent. They were shunned because of what they were saying about Israel. Who can save Israel if not these people? No one. It’s too late. That is my reflection. Can you reflect on the tour months later?

When we went on the Open Hillel tour, it wasn’t the synagogues that didn’t welcome us. What was worse–the campus Hillels didn’t welcome us. That’s worse. For these young people supposedly being taught in the United States of America that they should listen to various issues in order to make up their minds– 12 out of 13 Hillel’s wouldn’t welcome us.

But—we spoke at those 13 campuses. The Hillel’s didn’t welcome us but the other student groups rushed in to welcome us. And very many of those people were Jews. So this illustrates what I’m saying. The establishment leadership still thinks they still have things under control. And they intimidate the Hillel’s from inviting people like us. But they don’t realize that 20 to 30 percent of the membership of Students for Justice in Palestine (SJP) is Jewish. All over the country, the Hillel establishment is losing the kids, and those are the most vital, the most energetic, and the most thoughtful and critical kids. So the old-time Jewish establishment is hanging on to this institutional structure, like hanging on to a fish’s spine after you eat the fish.

If the established Jewish leadership has more rebellions like Open Hillel and they have more desertions, I suspect that what will happen is that the Jewish community leadership institutionally will get more and more vicious until they begin to see that the house of cards is falling down.

That’s what I’ve been feeling about the occupation: I don’t see that we’re going to lose this, how we can lose this? The Palestinians are going to win just by staying there. They practice “sumud,” the Arabic word for being “steadfast.” They’re going to win, because this is not a society that’s going to adapt to them under these conditions. The only way that Israel can adapt– the government of Israel can adapt– is by making this a multi-lingual multi-ethnic state, that’s the only way the pressure can be taken off.

But in order to prevent that from happening, since the Israeli government has the guns, the tanks, the airplanes– it looks to me like they could become more and more vicious and could use them.

On the street, I’m seeing more people with thumbs up, and more people who have always been opposed but who are more hateful in their responses. That seems to me to be a situation that’s going to go on for some time until there’s a tipping point, til people realize especially in Europe that they’re betting on the wrong horse.

What’s possibly analogous is the jockeying behind the scenes that occurred among the white rulers of South Africa when they realized that the end was near. There evidently were some white people who were smart enough to know that if they wanted to keep power, they had to give up some of their power. You could call them enlightened capitalists, whatever you want to call them. I think that’s starting to happen in Israel. We’re seeing the security apparatus openly criticizing Netanyahu, and who knows what else is going on that we don’t know anything about. They may be saying to themselves, this is the situation, it’s better to cope with reality. Better to do a, b, and c so that we keep a lot of what we have.

I do not see this state of affairs going on another 50 years, like it has in the past. This is not stable, this is not sustainable. The tide is definitely turning against the Israeli government.

Now it’s hard to see that on the ground; it’s hard when you go to these pro-Israel meetings and you see the same old hysteria. But if you look around, a lot of people at those meetings, in ten years are going to be dead. They’re in their 70’s and 80’s, and they’re clinging to some vision they had in 1948; and some of that vision was a good vision. I don’t want to take that away from them: the vision they had of being you know a phoenix coming out of the ashes and being a non-materialist society–which it actually was in the beginning. But they’re clinging on to that vision. And we know from what’s recently come out, a lot of people who fought for the Haganah, they were fighting because people told them it was kill or be killed. Many of them later came to realize: why did 700,000 Palestinians have to be removed, never to be permitted to come back, and all their goods stolen? Some people have had a crisis of conscience. And that’s why studying the Nakba is very important. And all the movies being made about that are very important. My favorite one is “The Great Book Robbery,” about all the books that were taken. Let’s not even talk about the houses, let’s talk about what’s was in the houses. Tom Segev says there was a warehouse in Tel Aviv with 50,000 rugs in it. And people just came and took whatever they wanted. Who did they think they were taking them from? This has to be dealt with.

And though it all looks permanent from the outside, it’s not. It’s totally impermanent. When the Palestinian citizens of Israel get organized, wow, we’re really going to be seeing something else.


%d bloggers like this: