some guy in lebanon

I swear it! Things are moving along – So since you know that I am still alive, allow me instead to switch topics.

I am going to post a long email I wrote to Ned recently. Some back story (from Ned):

An Ithaca alum went to Palestine last summer and wrote a piece about her work with the palestinian civilians who are affected by the war. She wrote an editorial supporting the civilians who usually get lumped together with Hamas and blamed for the conflict. This piece was published in the IC View, an Ithaca Newspaper sent to parents and alums, and available online for students. Many of these alums, family members, and students rose up in arms against this particular piece, calling it an anti-jew piece, and a pro-hamas piece. I’ve read it a couple times, and with the exception of a sentence i think she worded incorrectly, I can’t find any evidence of this. The president of IC came out and issued a formal apology stating that a new process of review for pieces submitted to the IC View is going to be instated, and he forced the editor to also publish an apology. To me (and many other students and alums) this piece was not in the wrong, and what they’re instating sounds a whole lot like Censorship. Can you read these and give me some insight as someone who is both geographically close and has great interest in the area it involves as to if I’m in the wrong here, and this piece should not have been published, or if the school is merely being pushed around by some donors.

Emily’s article: http://ithaca.edu/icview/5148/
President Rochon’s Response: http://www.ithaca.edu/icview/5269/
Maura’s Apology: http://www.ithaca.edu/icview/5270/

This situation literally infuriated me. If you read this girl’s article, it is ANYTHING but an anti-Israeli or a pro-Palestinian piece. Anything but. Please see image to the left if you have any doubt. The boy in the yamaka and the girl in conservative dress are clearly attacking an old woman wearing a hijab. ’nuff said – This stuff happens. The men in the background wearing green are Israeli soldiers…. sure don’t look like they’re doing much, does it?

So I sat down and wrote Ned back. This is what I wrote. It is long, and it is a diatribe, and it has spelling errors, and it has grammatical errors, and it is in all lower case. Sorry for all of that. But it was how I felt at the time, and I pray that Ned puts down the theatrical stuff for a few minutes and spends some time trying to bring academic integrity back to his school. I invite any comments or questions.

ned – to call this a pro-hamas piece is rather pathetic, given that it addresses the west bank, where hamas does not maintain any control – the west bank is controlled by israel, and politically under the guidance of the palestinian authority, which is governed mainly by the fatah political organization, a remnant of the palstininian liberation organization (PLO).

to call it incendiary is rather pathetic too – consider for example your friend’s statement that:

“But challenge them they must. When it comes to Israeli settlement activity, much more is at stake than the allocation of land and resources. Unchecked settler extremism is fostering a culture of violence that shapes the perspectives and experiences of everyone there. Its legacy will touch West Bank communities — no matter their ethnic composition — for generations to come.”

She is essentially saying that it is the responsibility of the Israeli soldiers who occupy, police, and essentially govern the west bank to control the situation and stop any violence perpetrated by anyone against anyone. it would be, for example, ridiculous (although it has happened) for an irish police officer in boston to not stop a mob of irishmen (whom we by blood related to, you and i) from beating up an italian baker. the irish police officer is tasked with defending the community, the state, and the constitution of both Massachusetts and the united states of america. as such, he (or she) is charged with defending the integrity of the law – the law in israel is quite clear on one thing, however – that israelis have more rights that palestnians living within the confines of occupation in the west bank (or ‘greater israel’ depending on how you look at it), but it is the responsibility of israeli soldiers to protect anyone in israel (including the west bank) who is under duress. palestinian included.

i’m really at a loss here – there is nothing inflammatory about what she has to say. she could have, for example, come to beirut and seen the children i tutor at sabra – the children who’s families are forbidden to return to their ancestral homeland, forbidden from working in the lebanese economy, and who underwent extraordinary stress at the hands of the phalangists and the idf and the amal group during the civil and camp wars of the 80′s, when many thousands of palestinian civilians were killed here in lebanon.

she could have said many things – she could have attacked the occupation, she could have attacked the very nature of the settlements – their illegality under international law, their conspicuous concordance to genocide, their overall obsenity to justice. she could have said all sorts of things – but the one thing she does not do is support hamas, support violence, support terrorism, be it israeli or arab – she does not call for the end of the occupation, she does not call for the end of settlements, she merely states that it is the responsibility of those who choose (or are forced) to live in the west bank to be good neighbors. to strengthen the bonds of peace.

those living in america clearly do not understand the conflict for what it is, especially the place of hamas – hamas does not operate in the west bank. hamas operates in gaza – both gaza and the west bank share commonality in terms of israeli durress, and palestinian heritage, but in terms of leadership, they are quiet different – also in terms of israeli existence in those two spaces, they are quite different. israel unilaterally “pulled out” of gaza in 2006 so theoretically there are no israelis there (theoretically) – this is not the case in the west bank – not only is israel there in force, but they make no qualms about calling it an occupied area – in fact they generally assume that it is not the west bank – that it is israel, and not palestine. and even if they ‘pulled out’ of the west bank, they are not under any circumstances going to give up settlements or certain areas of the west bank (such as the five star resorts on the dead sea)

so – what’s my point. my point is that nothing she wrote warrants an apology – she presents both sides in her article. almost nothing justifies violence and absolutely nothing justifies terrorism – she is merely stating that people should be aware that there is consistently violence perpetrated against palestinians by israeli settlers in the west bank – the west bank if an occupied zone which the international community generally recognizes as such, as does israel. it is therefore the basic human responsibility of israel to ensure that the quality of life, and the human security, of the palestinians living within their confines are at the very least reasonable – forget settlements, forget occupation, forget all of that – it is completely reasonable for your friend to address the issue that israeli soldiers must, at the very least, prohibit israeli settlements from acting violently against their palestinian neighbors, just as it is their responsibility to keep palestinians from attacking israelis. that is a fact of life.

your friend is not saying, for example, that ‘this is what i heard is going on’ – she is saying ‘this is what i saw.’ what she saw was through a window, a looking glass, of course – what she saw was just a slice of the picture, a small portrait. but what she saw is far more illustrative and demonstrative of the reality on the ground and the condition of the west bank than any american who has not been there can say. it is morally abhorrent and inconceivably anti-academic to suggest that what she is saying is somehow anti-semetic or pro-terrorism – she was not in gaza, therefore she has nothing to say about hamas. and though fatah can easily be called a terrorist organization, it still lacks the basic features of scholarly intelligence and academic pursuit to suggest that this young lady, emily mcneil, was doing anything other than telling her side of the story. she said what is plainly obvious to anyone who has actually been there: that what is happening to the palestinians in the west bank is rather tragic, given that the least the israeli soldiers tasked with guarding could do is protect them from violence, foreign and domestic.

so personally, i think you should tell anyone who has anything to say about it to pack a bag and travel to ramallah, or come to beirut and see what it’s like first hand. nobody has the right to talk about it unless they’ve been there and seen it. nobody has the right to tell anyone else’s story but their own. your president rochon should be marginally ashamed of his suggestion that this has anything to do with telling both sides of the story – if anyone at your school has been to southern israel and wishes to talk about the horrors of knowing that hamas could shoot a mortar into their living room, let them. if anyone at your school has been to sri lanka and wishes to discuss the horrors of the war between the tamil tigers and the government, let them. if anyone at your school has been to native american reserves and wishes to discuss their poor condition, let them. let them. let them tell their own story about what they say.

but do not for a minute believe that this was anything other than an unfair crucifixion of your friend, ms. mcneil – she has my full support, as does any american who is sympathetic to those who suffer possesses the right to discuss their witness to that suffering. call her a liar if you wish, but it is not the responsibility of the editor, mss. stephens, to suggest that there was somehow something wrong with the editorial process. a paper should be balanced over a period of its lifetime, and not get caught up in the need for a ‘point-counterpoint’ on a day to day basis. when it comes to israel, for example, if you have an inflammatory anti-israeli statement and an anti-palestinian statement, is that really the sort of discourse one wants for a student newspaper?

or in fact is it better that we get first-persons from people who have seen what has happened first hand, and allow people to have their own responses. student newspapers sole responsibility is to present the reality of the students it serves to inform. this is an ithica student who went to the west bank and saw what she saw. she did not accuse israel of doing anything other than failing, as far as she was concerned, to meet its basic duty to defend the people it chooses to control. the west bank is 100% in the control of israel – therefore it is their responsibility to protect those who are there. let anyone who chooses to disbelieve ms. mcneil travel there and see first hand.

that’s all i have to say – at the very least – let anyone who realy knows that ms. mcneil could not have been discussing hamas come forward – hamas does not operate in the west bank. hamas operates in gaza – the two territories are separated by hundreds of square kilometers and many tens of thousands of israeli soldiers. they are fairly mutually exclusive.

to support peace and non-violence is the duty of any sane and moral human being. to me, all ms. mcneil is calling for is the proper protection of under the control and influence of israel by israel. that is what is fair. there is nothing in her article calling for the end of the jewish state – those who would dare to question her should take a long hard look at themselves and ask “am i really calling for balance of a school newspaper, or am i merely pro-israeli and refuse to accept a discourse in my school paper that allows for some light to shine on the palestinian side of things.” it is essentially censure masked as freedom of speach. it is unacceptable at a institution of higher learning.

seriously though if anyone really wants to see what goes on, tell them to visit beirut – my guest room is waiting for them, or ramallah in the west bank – i have many friends there who would gladly take-in any american who wants to see what life is like there, and treat them like a king. tell anyone who wants to see what it is like to look into the eyes of innocent palestinian children and civilians – and to try to explain why they are forbidden from a homeland, forbidden to live in the homes their grandparents and great grandparents lived in for generations. then they’ll know that it is the duty of any freedom-loving american to know that truth: and one must see it for themselves. ms. mcneil did exactly that – she went to west bank. a brave thing. then she chose to share her thoughts with her community in an academic setting – equally brave. it is the most un-reasonable thing in the world to place this young woman in the same camp as terrorists.

that’s it. that’s all i got. hope this helps. frankly, i’m stunned and saddened. i wish your president rochon would be open to the idea that honest discourse does not require a point-counterpoint of equally inflammatory statements. it requires first-hand experience and reasoned discussion – ms. mcneil provided that and your campus crucified her. shame.

all my love and prayers to you,

will

The Dao that can be experienced is not true;
The world that can be constructed is not true.
The Dao manifests all that happens and may happen;
The world represents all that exists and may exist.
-Dao De Jing