Last week, the Emory Students for Justice in Palestine (ESJP) posted a sign on a wall they built outside the Dobbs University Center (DUC) stating “ISRAEL IS AN APARTHIED STATE.” In addition to the previously cited misspelled version of the word “apartheid” on the second sign created, the sign contained a series of short essays, blurbs and charts describing various aspects of the Israel-Palestine conflict, specifically focusing on the Israeli military effort in Gaza that took place during the summer of 2014. These essays listed many of the perceived injustices that Israel is committing against Palestine, then ultimately called upon the reader of the sign to spread awareness about the conflict and specifically mentioned the role of the United States as a major financial supporter of Israel, implying that the United States has had a role in committing these injustices as well.
On the night of Sunday, Feb. 22, a group of Emory University students dismantled this sign. In response, Emory’s Dean of Campus Life Ajay Nair sent a campus-wide email describing the important nature of “vigorous debate” on campus. As an individual, I do not claim to represent any group of people on either side of this debate. However, I do feel obligated to point out certain aspects of the sign that I feel to be both offensive and blatantly misleading due to the selective nature in which the ESJP presented information and the intentionally biased framing of certain opinions as truths.
First, such an overtly abrasive remark made about Israel in such a public area of campus is hardly the justified voicing of an opinion or the beginning of constructive dialogue. This sign was nothing short of a direct attack on a nation that many Emory students call home, and many others identify with as a symbol of their faith.
I would urge the administration to acknowledge the potentially harmful nature of this sentiment and encourage students with opinions on both sides of the issue to voice those opinions less offensively in the future. The terms “Pro-Justice in Palestine” and “Anti-Israel” need not and should not be synonymous, as it is possible for students to advocate for the human rights of Palestinians without framing their concerns in a way that comes across as a direct attack against Israelis or the Israeli government.
In addition to carrying a message that was unnecessarily inflammatory, the sign was also misleading. The biased nature in which ESJP glossed over some aspects of the conflict and blatantly omitted others would have made it impossible for a reader of their sign to form a coherent, unbiased opinion on the issue.
The most egregious example of this that I have committed to memory (the sign is, at this point, unavailable to consult physically) is the way that the authors of the essays in question described the organization Hamas.
When describing Hamas, ESJP failed to identify it as a terrorist organization despite the fact that the rockets they fire at Israel often target purely civilian areas and structures without any military significance. Although the Iron Dome, Israel’s anti-rocket defense system, is effective in intercepting almost all of the rockets fired by Hamas, many Israeli civilians still face the daily reality of international terrorism as Hamas’ rocket fire forces them routinely to run for bomb shelters.
To put this state of constant fear in perspective, during the 10-year period of 2004-2014, Hamas fired a rocket into Israel every seven hours on average.
Furthermore, ESJP described Hamas as “seeing violence as a means to an end.” The “end” that the ESJP failed to specify in this essay is the complete genocide of the Jewish people, as explicitly stated in Hamas’ charter:
“The hour of judgment shall not come until the Muslims fight the Jews (and kill them), so that the Jews hide behind trees and stones.”
This is not a statement specific to Israel; this quote comes from Article 7 in the section of the Hamas covenant titled the “Universality of Hamas” and is quite literally a call for a global Jewish genocide.
The Israeli armed response to what can only be called international terrorism has resulted in large death tolls in the Gaza Strip, as the essays on the sign pointed out. The writers of these essays, however, failed to mention the reasons behind the large civilian death tolls in Gaza. Hamas places their stores of rockets and other weaponry inside of civilian structures such as homes and hospitals to discourage the Israeli armed forces from bombing these weapon caches, essentially creating a human shield of innocent people to protect weapons the government intends to use in terror attacks. In response, the Israel Defense Forces (IDF) warns civilians in areas that are going to be bombed ahead of time through both airdropped fliers and direct phone calls, urging them to vacate the premises, a practice that the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff and United States Army General Martin E. Dempsey said “went to extraordinary lengths to limit collateral damage and civilian casualties.” The Hamas government, on the other hand, urges these civilians to stay and die in order to try to protect their weapons caches.
In other words, Hamas directly encourages the martyrdom of its own citizens.
The situation in the Gaza Strip is unconscionable, and the Israel-Palestine conflict has displaced many innocent people and led to the deaths of many others. This is a human-rights travesty, and the rest of the world must unite to bring those responsible for it to justice. The entity at fault here, however, is not the IDF that aim to protect Israeli civilians from rocket strikes and secure a safe future for the Israeli people.
The entity at fault is the ruthless terrorist organization whose policies have led to the virtual suspension of international aid into Palestine. The same group who uses funds to construct illegal tunnels across Israeli borders and purchase weapons, as opposed to build much needed schools and hospitals for its citizens. The government that encourages women and children to die in order to protect their rocket caches. Justice in Palestine is an admirable goal, but it will not be accomplished through spreading hate for Israel. The rest of the world can begin to help the Palestinians once the government in charge in the Gaza Strip is not composed of genocidal, self-serving terrorists.
If ESJP truly wants to see fairer and safer conditions for the Palestinian people, they might do better in the future to try to inform the student body about the conflict fairly as opposed to posting blatantly offensive and misleading anti-Israel propaganda on Emory’s campus. If campus groups present information in this manner, Emory students can be unified in their desire to see the removal of Hamas as a governing power and protection of human rights in Gaza without becoming bogged down in an argument where students feel they have to either protect or condemn Israel.
Tyler Zelinger is a College sophomore from Commack, New York.
I think the problem is that both sides selectively present facts due to the emotional nature of the matter…..both sides resort to the tactics seen in polarized political parties. This just makes sense because both sides have an “us versus them” mentality. To me, there doesn’t seem to be much empathy for the other sides viewpoint and there isn;t much of an attempt to think through possible solutions (though this may be changing among younger generations). I had hoped that the title of this would suggest that you were going to address this issue, but naturally you did exactly what you condemned and singled out claims on one side. Also, it is not anyone’s job to protect the feelings of a majority/stronghold on campus. If that is how many people feel about that issue or see it, then so be it. Please be offended, but do not make silly statements that link their desire to gaining justice for Palestinians to whether or not you are offended by their language. The language is likely inflammatory in nature to make people think more deeply about the issue, and even if they had used soft language that pooed pooed on many of the actions of the other side, it would be poorly received and viewed as “anti-Israel” among many or most. So let us be honest, they can’t win on any front when expressing their concerns. This idea that we must always work to not offend someone has gone too far especially given how easily many people are offended. In addition, the conflict is extremely complex precisely because of the fact that many Palestinians would also like to call that place home…..Are you really surprised that such language is used when they present the issue. I am not. As an African American, if I called certain US southern states racist in nature (in terms of policies and behaviors of the state government officials on things such as voting rights/voter ID laws and more), and felt strongly about it, I am not worrying about offending people in that “state they call home” (and those who may say something similar to you such as: “If you really wanted justice for African Americans, you wouldn’t play the race card”) and naturally, if I feel strongly about it, I may selectively present facts as someone defending themselves against the claim would present facts or put a spin on the nature of their actions. To pretend that only 1 side of this conflict presents their ideas with a heavy dose of bias is absurd.
Only in their Holy Land could the Jews weave their own destinies at last —
and do. Israel thrives. They have won Nobel prizes and made some of the
greatest advances in science, technology, and medicine. Israelis create
world-class hospitals and universities. They have written more scientific
papers per capita than any other nation, and have saved children’s lives –
Palestinian children’s lives – in a dozen operating theatres, and sent aid
teams around the world to save yet more lives. Israeli “apartheid”?
Far from it. All facilities and opportunities are equally open to all Israelis:
Black, White, Arab, Christian, Jew — everyone. Far more than in say, Saudi
Arabia, where there are special roads for non-Muslims to ensure they cannot
enter Mecca or Medina, or where a Bible is not even allowed in the country. Or
all the mosques where every Friday congregants are told that Jews are the sons
of pigs and apes. It would seem that is racism; that is apartheid.
What the destroyers of Israel would do is negate every one of Israel’s
achievements and more, and leave a hole in the world, in their own world. What,
after all, would take the place of Israel? Another failed state, riven by
strife, characterized by failure, poverty-stricken, dependent, just another
victim of the authoritarian Arab way of governing? Is that something that will
set civilization towards new horizons? It is up to us to keep the lights on, to
place civilization against barbarism, to put our minds and bodies between
Israel and all who mean her ill.
That’s nice Arafat…..very nice. Several different types of people live in Israel in terms of religious beliefs. Also, think about how it was before it even became the principle state for Jewish citizens around the world. It was your stereotypical state without any of the issues you cite as happening “if we had something else there”. Also, as normal, your comments have nothing to do with this issue of expression. It is mainly just pro-Israel (or as I should say, to be facetious, “anti-Muslim) propaganda.
Anon, not my problem your disconnect with reality.
Yep, me….not you. Only one type of person lives in Israel and before those types of people arrived there, the area was full of anarchy (area has somehow been tamed…as suggested by what is happening there now)….yep definitely disconnected with reality and history. I have no actual stake in this issue, so will allow you to say whatever except for making unfounded assertions or speculations that can be refuted. But you will be ignored after this because their is no point in engaging you. We were already warned about how ridiculous you are as a poster.
Israel has no ‘us vs. them’ ideology. Israel is quite accepting of many religious beliefs and skin colors.
Either you support Israel, or you support the Husseini-Eichmann spawned quislings of hamas and fatah. It’s really quite simple, no need for extremely long, indentation and carriage return-free discourse.
Excuse me? the level of discourse when it comes to this conflict does suggest “us versus them” attitudes and no opportunities for nuance. Anytime anyone suggests that the actions of Israel in a certain case are less than optimal, the person is automatically considered “anti-Isreal” or “pro-terrorist”. Do not try to play this bullcrap and then claim that only one side is being completely biased. Often you both freakin’ suck at “discourse” and spout inflammatory and biased crap and call it discourse. Your language suggests that anyone who even calls it a conflict is supporting terrorists or is anti-Israel. No, it is a conflict where both groups are being very negatively effected.
Your intolerance for Jewish self defense–the right of the Jewish people to protect themselves from 3rd Reich adherents, indicates that your anti-Jew bigotry precludes you from providing objective analysis. So sad.
Yep, intolerance and anti-Jew bigotry. That is what my post was about. Makes lots of sense. I totally said that Israel has no right to self-defense somewhere in there. I am sure that is how it would be viewed by an “objective” viewpoint. In addition, I totally mentioned anything about “Jewish self-defense” anywhere. Such comments of yours are exactly why there is no “discourse”. Also, seeing ideas that are just not there…..totally acceptable in discourse. How silly…….I just hope you are not an Emory student or alum because it would suggest that this school does a poor job of providing a liberal arts education if you read my post and got that from it. The flame war ends here though. I get to claim therefore that I read this response as saying, “all Palestinians concerned about this are Nazis and even those who are innocent should blame their terrorist organization for their demise”. Because that would totally be appropriate….No point in engaging any of you because there is no rationale, just one-sided emotional responses purely in favor of one thing and against the other. No nuance. If I am anti-Israel or pro-terrorist for sympathizing for both parties and all individuals negatively affected by this conflict, then so be it. I will not abandon facts in favor of taking a side or avoiding a stupid, undeserved label, sorry.
what else to explain your disdain for a security wall built by Israel to protect ALL Israelis from the Husseini-Eichmann worshiping mass murderers outside of Israel–mass murderers that are rewarded with US tax dollars used to prop up the fatah/hamas quisling regimes, which are then paid to the families of said murderers.
Consider typing in paragraphs, and actually putting in a little whitespace.
Incidentally, you are indeed quite hostile towards Israel, as are all that seek to whitewash and ignore the origins of this ‘conflict’, which is funded and sponsored by the US State Department and European Union, which pay Muslims to kill Jews (in addition to paying Muslims to kill a wide variety of civil and human rights supporters elsewhere around the world).
Anon: It’s actually hilarious that you hope the other poster doesn’t go to Emory, when in fact, you are the embarrassment to the school. You “will not abandon facts?” I actually laughed out loud at that one. You have no facts cutie. Not one thing you said is a fact. The poster however, is supporting the article, which presents very clear facts. I’m sorry if you have trouble reading, but you should refrain from writing since you do. Everything else I want to say to you is in my comment I wrote below (Arafat’s posting stream). Go get an education and stop insulting people that actually have one.
Tyler,
Thank you very much for writing this excellent article.
This is a very poorly written and inaccurate article. As a Jew, I am ashamed to see the unity of church and state in Israel. Israel is by definition an apartheid state. This is not misleading. The definition is very readily available and so are the facts of the situation. Your soft language is misleading if anything. The sign was not “dismantled”, it was vandalized and destroyed in an act of suppression of free speech. The spelling of the word “apartheid” is irrelevant, and so are most of the points you make. You claim to have read the wall. If you had done so, you would know that ESJP does not support Hamas. They want to end the occupation. They want to point out Israel’s goal to have all Palestinians eradicated from the area so they can have an exclusively jewish state. Nobody supports violence at Emory (hopefully, though it sounds like you may from your incompetent portrayal of a serious issue), especially not ESJP. Hamas is a terrorist organization by definition, but its worth noting the relativity of what qualifies as a terrorist organization. For example, the United States and practically every other country is a terrorist organization by the UN definition of such. Being against occupation does not mean against Israel. Pointing out that apartheid is happening is not offensive (as a Jew, I’d be offended if the holocaust were referred to as anything but ‘genocide’), its just the truth. Most of all, being against Israel’s one state solution is not anti semitic. Thats the problem when you bond church and state. We don’t need to protect or condemn Israel as you say (though you clearly have chosen a side!), but we ought to condemn oppression, occupation, and violence. Israel does all three of these things. Once again, nobody except for Hamas (including the Palestinian people and ESJP) supports Hamas. Overall a fairly worthless article. Perhaps look at the “truth” wall posted nearby and see actual misrepresentation of the conflict.
Israel is a secular state, and meets no definition of apartheid, which is the actual policy of the 3rd Reich spawned fatah and hamas quisling regimes. It’s clear from your post that you’re not a Jew, but rather are just another dumb, intolerant Muslim seeking an ethnically clean Muslim only state on land that belongs to the Jews.
Ew this comment is gross.
Ew, Amelia, you’re like a 12 year old girl.
12 year old girls are icky! you tell um!
truuuuuu
I wonder how the rabbi that bar mitzvah’d me would feel about me being a dumb, intolerant Muslim. You sound like an angry bigoted child.
If you actually are a jew you need to stop advertising it, because you’re an embarrassment to the religion. Stop calling other people children when you are the one who only responds with fallacies or straight up lies, you are the one who refuses to actually learn about the situation in Israel, and you are the one who thinks it’s ok to actually share your made up shit with people. Plus, only a child would use the cover of a “concerned jew” to attempt to give their comments validity. I will respond to all of your “facts” in the above post. I suggest you read them and actually learn something. Don’t respond. The more you say, the more your stupidity shines through.
You asking me not to respond illustrates the gravity of this situation. I won’t be silenced by your insults. I use anonymity because people like yourself take this issue seriously enough to make me fear for my safety on campus (talk about terrorist, am I right?). Please point out my fallacy or lie and I will be happy to show you why it is not one.
What. Did. I. Say. Above? Let’s try to read this together. I very specifically told you that I responded to each of the stupid things you said in my other post. I don’t like to waste my time with people who can’t even comprehend what’s being very clearly explained.
I got bar mitzvah’d so hard I couldn’t even remember it the next morning.
Except that you’re the one that continuously slanders Jews as occupiers, hates Jewish self defense, and posts repeatedly in support of the Eichmann-Husseini genocide movement, currently embodied by their disciples in hamas and fatah.
You’re posting nothing but taqiyya.
They are occupiers. I do not slander jews. I slander Israeli policy. This is pretty simple stuff here, I’m not sure how I can more lucidly explain it. If you think I support genocide you aren’t reading what I say and giving me the same respect that I give you. This is not a debate, it is a one sided assault on my character.
Incorrect again. They’re legally allowed to live throughout Judea and Samaria. They are no more occupiers than blacks living in the US.
You tell him man! All those dumb intolerant muslims seeking clean states! Once, one came up to me and was like “Bro, god willing, I will clean all of this land with the hand of god and this travel size bottle of pine-sol”. These monsters must be stopped. What will they clean next?!?
When it comes to your comedic aspirations I can only recommend that you keep your day job.
I appreciate your feedback. A few points:
1. The statement “Israel is an apartheid state” is an opinion. I invite you to do some research and find that there are many South African anti-apartheid activists who denounce this comparison. For an example, feel free to consult this New York Times article by Richard Goldstone (http://www.nytimes.com/2011/11/01/opinion/israel-and-the-apartheid-slander.html?_r=1&ref=opinion), who as a previous member of the South African Constitutional Court is more qualified to speak on the issue of apartheid as opposed to either one of us.
2. The misspelling of apartheid is incredibly relevant, and represents the under-researched and careless nature in which facts were presented on the sign that I was aiming to point out in this article.
3. The vague and equivocal nature with which Hamas was described was troubling to me, and I felt the need to point it out. At no point did I imply that ESJP supported Hamas, I simply urged them to be more clear about the organization’s role in the conflict in the future as opposed to simply glossing over the fact that they are a group with a self-declared policy of global Jewish genocide.
4. If you carefully re-read the title of this article, you would see that it is a response to specific statements made by the ESJP, and not intended to be a full summary of this multifaceted conflict. Such a summary would take far more than the 1,000 words allotted to a writer of an op-ed in the Emory Wheel. I appreciate your concerns that this article may be inaccurate, but I would invite you to re-read and comment with any specific factual “inaccuracies”, so that I may supply you with documentation of their validity.
5. Finally, as for your concerns that we do not need to “protect or condemn” Israel, I would agree that doing so is not necessary to have this argument or constructive in reaching a solution to this issue. However, this article was written due to the fact that in their attack on Israel (it can be called nothing else), the ESJP misrepresented facts and glossed over important aspects of the conflict. This is simply a response meant to point out some of those discrepancies.
If an organization would like to make claims of informing our student body or spreading awareness, they must be held accountable for what they say. I am sorry you feel this way about my article, but again, invite you to follow up with your claims of inaccuracy citing specific examples in the article.
Thanks for reading.
Thank you for the swift reply. I will respond to each point accordingly.
1. Apartheid is defined as segregation based off of ethnicity or race. The discrepancy here may be that Judaism is neither an ethnicity nor race, a reasonable retort. However, the point remains clear. Whether or not it is deemed apartheid (and this no doubt seems to be the most accurate term to describe whats happening), Palestinians are being sectioned off due to their race and not being Jewish. Similar to south african apartheid, Palestinians are given cards that deem them as such and restrict their access to locations that were initially their land (viz. illegal israeli settlements that were built in opposition to the geneva convention). However, I feel apartheid here is used as a rhetorical tool to demonstrate the similarities between South African apartheid and what is happening now in the Middle East. It is not intended as an attack on Jewish people, it is meant to invoke thought.
2. The misspelling does not represent a lack of research nor carelessness. Research is not conducive to petty spelling errors (this was merely two letters in the wrong order, not something heinous as is portrayed by your suggestion). More likely, it represents a Palestinian whose second language is english.
3. On the wall, Hamas was defined as a terrorist organization. However, it is important to note that Hamas is once again entirely irrelevant, as the occupation preceded Hamas.
4. I carefully re-read the title as per your recommendation and have not found any elucidation there. As I said before, ESJP does not appear anti-israel, nor is deeming Israel an apartheid state anti-israel. I agree that this conflict is far deeper than is easily grasped in 1000, let alone any amount of reasonable words- however, an accurate portrayal is essential for making progress. In painting ESJP in the light you have, you have delegitimized discourse entirely. A factual inaccuracy is mentioned above in #3. You claimed the wall failed to identify Hamas as a terrorist organization. It did.
5. You claim that their wall can be called nothing but an attack on Israel. That is not true. The wall was intended to inform and merely that. What is interesting that I have noticed about ESJP is that it is comprised almost exclusively of assorted minorities. These minorities each experience a different breed of oppression. Thus, it makes sense they support a cause that is concerned with oppression. ESJP did not misrepresent facts – please provide evidence for such a claim. I saw no discrepancies. However, as a firm advocate for truth I encourage you to provide them so ESJP may move forward with that knowledge (as they are very open to criticism, which I have provided them as well).
Hopefully this clears up some of the points I made above. If I have made any mistakes please point them out and we can move from there. Otherwise, I hope you realize that it was not ESJP’s intention (at least I certainly did not interpret it that way, as they welcomed me and answered my questions) to attack Israel and certainly not Jews. Thanks again for your response, I hope to see another.
No, it is Palestinian society which mirrors the apartheid regime of South Africa. It is official Palestinian Authority policy that no Jew can live in any territory it administers. isn’t that apartheid?
As for Hamas run Gaza, their policy, as stated in the freely available charter, is to kill every last Jew on earth in a mass genocide.
Your hypocrisy is evident.
It is not official PA policy that no jew can live in any territory it administers. There are samaritan jews living in the West Bank. Read the photo and note it is Israeli law.
As for Hamas, yes you are right. They are anti semitic.
Where is my hypocrisy?
Right—the ‘concerned Jew’ so desperate to illustrate how much fatah loves dhimmi Jews.
You have clearly missed my point. You beg for evidence. I have provided it. Your response? An absurd sarcastic claim. This is why I say above there is no progress to be had. The people who support this issue so viciously that they would call someone a “dumb, intolerant muslim” evidently will not change their mind. Its like arguing with a bigoted wall.
Dude, I think we better quit…..these folks are like most Republicans in their opinion on climate change. If it is cold in their town, or worse, snowing, must not be happening. In this case, it is: “There should be no conflict, nothing was done to the Arabs, and besides they are useless”. Gotta love this “discourse”.
Feel free to document what exactly has been ‘done to’ the Arabs, who as Kirchwey amply documented, were the pets of Western colonialism in 1948, and have continued unabated in such position through the present.
You still haven’t cited any actual laws, but your sign does seem to indicate that the Israeli government is discriminating against only Israeli civilians–which is repulsive, and fails to help your case–that this government is systematically oppressing palestinian Arabs.
The sign is because this is Palestinian Area A and Israel cannot guarantee the safety of Israeli citizens entering Area A. I have an experiment for Mr Azzajew. GO to area A and see if you can purchase land there
So you are saying the PA is apartheid because any Jew entering the area it controls risks being killed while Arabs are free to go anywhere they want.
If Israel is technically a secular government, no one is talking about fighting jews off. They are talking about the Israeli government. If you read the jewish scripture you would know, like us orthodox jews you would know we are not supposed to have a jewish homeland. That is against what our god says.
You are very ignorant of your own religion.
Actually the Torah is replete with calls for the Jewish people to return home to the land of Israel. Thanks for showing everyone at Emory how ignorant and anti Semitic the anti Israel crowd is.
No one with any education will fall for you pretending to be an Orthodox Jew. I suggest you take into to Judaism to at least get some knowledge before you pretend to be a Jew
If Israel is technically a secular government, no one is talking about fighting jews off. They are talking about the Israeli government. If you read the jewish scripture you would know, like us orthodox jews you would know we are not supposed to have a jewish homeland. That is against what our god says.
You are very ignorant of your own religion Arafat.
There’s no occupation, and there’s no apartheid, in spite of your evidence-free opinions. You’ve used up a lot of bandwidth and we’re still waiting for you to cite the laws or charter that are analogous to the genocidal and apartheid policies of fatah or hamas. So far, you’re just shooting blanks.
This is fundamentally nonsense and judging by your comment below you aren’t really worth talking to. Look to author of this article’s response to my comment. He at least is somewhat constructive in his criticism. Don’t paint yourself a fool, for the cause you support is represented by each component.
First and foremost, the fact that a government with explicit intents of genocide in their charter was democratically elected during the 21st century is far from irrelevant. To me, it is terrifying.
That said, I agree that an accurate portrayal of the situation is vital in creating constructive dialogue on Emory’s campus. The unfortunate truth that I aimed to highlight in this article, however, is that ESJP failed in their supposed mission to inform Emory students and spread awareness. Specifically, the sign portrayed the United States’ financial relationship with Israel as unconscionable. The sign was presented as a summary of the conflict thus far, and subsequently urged students to take action regarding the conflict by spreading awareness. The issue I wanted to point out through writing this article was that it is fundamentally wrong to encourage people to spread awareness about something you have just only “half-informed” them about, and the statements on the sign were undeniably one-sided and yes, anti-Israel.
My mission here was not to decry the “mission” of ESJP, but their methods. As stated explicitly in the article, I feel that the safeguarding of the human rights of people living in the Gaza Strip is an incredibly important issue. I remain convinced, however, that the wall posted by the ESJP was counteractive if anything in terms of educating Emory’s community regarding this issue and that Israel was given a vastly over-proportional share of the blame, as opposed to the blatantly genocidal government that runs the Gaza Strip. I hope they continue to advocate for human rights, but would urge them to do so in a way that is not as blatantly confrontational and one-sided in the future.
In anticipation of the response that this article was also one-sided, I’d like to point out that it is presented in the “Opinion” section of a publication and presented as a direct rebuttal of specific points made on the wall. Unlike the ESJP, I do not imply that I have sufficiently explained the entire Israel/Palestine conflict (as you said, to do so would require far more words as well as the efforts of intellectuals who have studied the issue far more extensively than I) and subsequently urge people to take substantive anti-Israel (pushing for the cessation of US funds to Israel is anti-Israel). In fact, I do not urge people to do anything at all, save for suggesting to the ESJP that they present their arguments in a more constructive manner in their future endeavors. Instead, my goal here is to point out what I feel were misleading statements that urged students to take uninformed action and ultimately accomplished little towards what you believe to be their goal of informing people.
Thanks again for taking the time to reply.
As far as Hamas and its role in the conflict goes, I highly recommend reading this: http://www.npr.org/2006/12/06/6583080/hamas-government-or-terrorist-organization. It is an unbiased account of the happenings in the middle east right now and in the past. I recommend reading it all the way through, but if you don’t have the time (its short but its midterm week so I get that) look at the second paragraph and the 5th and 4th from last (the latter two represent the two major sides).
I agree that it is essential to promote an environment in which both sides can openly speak their voice. However, the apartheid wall was very straightforward in what it presented. It did not present half of the picture, but rather the whole from a perspective majorly unbiased. It is not ESJP’s job to talk about Hamas, as Hamas is irrelevant in the occupation as I said before. Looking at the article above, it is easy to extrapolate that Hamas is a response to the occupation. Unfortunately, the response to the apartheid wall, the “truth” wall was factually inaccurate and extremely biased. If you want to talk about discourse, maybe say that “dismantling” the wall is an act of oppression in and of itself. Ultimately people will say what they may, if it is listened to or not is the decision of the listener determined by the rationality and evidence.
You say blatant confrontation is bad for advocating for human rights. That is almost laughable to me. I don’t laugh though, because millions of Palestinians die and are refugees at the cost of the general ignorance of people who are so easily offended by words like apartheid. The solution to this issue rests in compromise, and your insistence that Hamas is the problem is paradoxical and nonsensical. The problem can’t be Hamas, as (once again) Hamas came to power long after the occupation ensued. What is terrifying to me is that people felt the need to democratically elect a violent regime in response to oppression. Blatant confrontation is clearly whats needed. I for one am not for violent confrontation as Hamas is. However, people that you may idolize such as Nelson Mandela (again, mentioned in the article) employed such tactics and were labeled terrorists. Perhaps we ought to reconsider our colloquial use of the word terrorist, and the islamophobia and bigotry associated with it too.
Your article is one-sided, as you said. Claiming its in the opinion section doesn’t really make that better, considering you promote a binary agenda as an approach to this issue. Unfortunately I don’t feel I can often even talk about this issue, as my family has labeled me a self hating jew and truthfully there just isn’t much progress to be had with such stubborn folk who think that to diss israel’s policy and occupation is to diss jews. I can’t really continue to spoon feed facts here, they are easily within reach. The internet is an excellent source. There are numerous scholarly articles discussing this conflict that show all of the sides.
Ultimately there isn’t much progress to be had. America has an agenda and the media reflects it. Crony capitalism at its finest I suppose. Whats upsetting is that folks who vie for human rights (much like you, who claims to) seem to have a blind spot when it comes to this issue. I question whether its your ties to judaism – this being again a problem of church and state – or the constant social and media brainwashing occurring in communities all around America.
My hope is that you read what I say and try your hardest to absorb it all as I have with what you’ve said. This issue isn’t about semantics. In the end it comes down to human lives and human rights. Being stubborn just isn’t worth it. Thats why I endure the label of self hating jew with pride, as it is an indication of the close mindedness surrounding this very real problem. Israeli citizens should not have to live in fear of a government elected in response to oppression. I am for peace, and because I am for peace I am against the policies of both Israel as an occupier and Hamas as a violent regime.
How you could possibly think Hamas is irrelevant is so beyond me. If you believe that, you clearly are not capable of knowing the difference between fact and fallacy. You are so close minded, or just stupid, that trying to teach you anything about the reality of the situation is a waste of time. However, I am going to call you out on a couple of things.
1) I read the npr article you posted. It is only recounting what each person said in the debate about Hamas. Npr doesn’t support anything you said. The 5th paragraph from the last is actually saying the complete opposite of what you said. I’m guessing you miscounted and were trying to point out the 2 people that supported your point. This is not evidence. This is people’s point of views in a debate plus, the 2 people in support of Hamas were the minority in the panel.
2) What’s laughable is your stupidity. You claim his points are inaccurate however, you don’t ever (in any of your posts) give any evidence showing that his claims are false. You don’t because you can’t. It doesn’t exist, since everything Tyler said is true. Oh wait, you did say that tyler’s claim that the wall didn’t mention how Hamas is a terrorist organization, was false, however, he stated in the article that he was doing it from memory. He probably doesn’t remember it since everything else on the wall was trying to prove how wonderful Hamas is.
3) Palestinians die because, like tyler pointed out, Hamas places weapons inside civilian homes and then commands them to stay there even though they are warned about oncoming attacks on their WEAPONS. Also you claimed “millions of Palestinians die” when, in fact, only thousands have. Nice little complete inaccuracy you slipped in their to try to make your point sound legitimate.
4) You are a self-hating jew cutie, that’s why your family calls you that.
5) “Being stubborn isn’t worth it” Oh wow. Once again, we have facts, you do not. This makes you the stubborn one since you refuse to see the truth in the situation. You and that anon kid should hit the library together. I don’t have time to teach someone who “endures the label self hating jew with pride.” That’s actually nauseating.
No one is saying that it is irrelevant fool. We’re just saying that it is not the cause of all this which is what the article would suggest. This conflict is quite old actually. Like, honestly, just as many can hate the fact the fact that Hamas bombs or fires on on random people (and I do), one can question the necessity of the pre-emptive military strikes of the Israeli government in the early portions of the conflict. One can also question things like settlements, etc. This conflict is not one-sided and is not reducible to “we have to protect ourselves from the actions of one side which is led by a terrorist organization”. That is ridiculous to just completely ignore everything else.
No one said that it was irrelevant? Actually, “a concerned Jew” literally used those exact words. Your poor intellect and innability to read is showing.
I am well aware what the 5th from last paragraph said. I, unlike my abrasive counterpart (thats you) like to illustrate both sides of the conflict. I felt the second paragraph is a very good portrayal of the issue at hand. An issue that has perpetrators on both sides Melanie. An issue that isn’t assisted by ad hominem attacks. The occupation predated hamas (I tire of repeating this).
I provided evidence repeatedly. I can post pictures of the wall if you’d like to support them. You saying that the wall tried to prove how wonderful Hamas is is just openly incorrect.
Palestinians die because of that, yes. They also die from losing their homes. Having their supplies restricted by israelis. And the repeated bombings that strike areas where there aren’t even weapons. By the way, the weapons don’t belong to Palestinian citizens. They belong to Hamas.
I dont hate jews. I don’t support Israel’s policy. I don’t support Hamas. I will continue to say this in the hopes you might actually read and absorb it.
Do you know what ad hominem means? You obviously don’t because you utilize it (and that’s why I called you out on it…but you certainly do look cool trying to throw it back on me!) and I do not. So I’m done with you. I cannot argue with some who has an IQ below 50.
https://yourlogicalfallacyis.com/ad-hominem
Hahah cutie I’m attacking both your character and your arguments.
NPR is not an objective source of information. An objective source would include the primary source accounts of what occurred in 1948, which then enables one to see the clear pro-Islamist mass media bias of the subsequent 65+ years.
You can start by reading ‘British Record on Partition’, Freda Kirchwey’s memoranda to the UN which detail the degree to which the Arabs and their British masters were sabotaging partition, as well as the big lie rhetoric of Arab leaders (who at that time blamed Jews for bringing communism to the middle east, a propaganda line sponsored by their British masters).
So apartheid would be Saudi Arabia banning non Muslims from Mecca and Medina, or the Muslim Waqf banning Jewish prayer on the Temple Mount Judaisms holiest site.
Apartheid would be the Palestinian Authority having the death penalty for selling land to a Jew.
Apartheid would be a demand for a Jew free Palestine.
Not apartheid would be Israel having a Israeli Arab Supreme Court Justice supervising its upcoming election.
He suffers from Azzajew syndrome. He is not self hating because he loves himself, but is happy when Hamas attacks Israeli civilians. He derives vicarious joy from harm to other Jews
Why are you posting as a Jew? You are not fooling anyone. write your real name….
If Israel wishes to eradicate the Arabs of Israel they are doing a very bad job of it as the Arab population is growing.
If you are worried about Arabs being slaughtered shouldn’t you be worried about ISIS. They killed about 300,000 in the last year.
If you were worried about religion and state why not condemn every single country in the Organization of Islamic States. Indeed the Palestine you seek to replace Israel with defines itself as Islamic.
We know the answer your goal isn’t to fight apartheid, its to kill Jews.
This is an incredible response and so articulate!!
Your opinion is akin to an Indian saying Pakistan is solely responsible for the communal violence ensuing between the countries or vice-versa. It is flawed, immature, juvenile and shocking considering your are an educated adult.
You should try actually giving some evidence to support your comments. Unfortunately you can’t, because it doesn’t exist. It’s actually funny how you claim the factual, evidence supported article is flawed, immature and juvenile, when you sweetheart, are the incorrect one who presents their case as well as a middle schooler.
I like how you called him a sweetheart. It’s really nice of you. You seem very pleasant. Have a terrific day!
Get out of here! This is not a place for logic. How dare you bring that to this debate.
As I’ve stated before, this article was intended as a direct response to certain specific statements made on the wall and a critique on the methods of the ESJP, not a conclusive summary of the conflict by any means. I don’t see how direct rebuttals of certain statements made by the ESJP is comparable to summing up the entire Israel/Palestine conflict in one sentence, as you would apparently accuse me of doing with your analogy.
I welcome you to point out any specific factual “flaws” regarding anything I said about these particular aspects of the conflict in this article.
Thanks for your constructive and informative feedback.
I really like how you point stuff out and then say more stuff about the stuff you pointed out. Really great stuff. Keep it up! 🙂
You mean reinforce my point with evidence and logic? Thanks!
I was responding in a hurry as I had to leave. It is not my responsibility to write article like responses. The point just needs to get across and I’m sure it did, which is why you responded. This is not to say that I actually read anything below “your first point is not English” because I’m sure whatever it was does not matter. There is no point in us responding to each other because you clearly do not believe Palestinians have legitimate concerns at all and thus will not be convinced that they do and nor will you be convinced that they should be able to express their grievances and be taken seriously. Likewise, I will not be convinced that I am stupid for sympathizing for issues occurring on both sides of the fence. This “discussion” is relatively pointless because we are nowhere near on the same page.
Well ask yourself some questions.
Why was no one interested in a Palestinian state in May 1967 when Judea, Samaria and Gaza were ruled by Jordan and Egypt?
Why does SJP claim democratic Israel is an apartheid state for being Jewish but has no problem with Islamic Saudi Arabia or the Islamic State of Iran?
If Israel is committing genocide against her Arab population why is it growing not shrinking? Shouldn’t they all be dead by now if that was the goal?
If Arab lives matter why aren’t they protesting the hundreds of thousands killed in Syria by Assad?
If Arab lives matter why aren’t they protesting the hundreds of thousands killed by ISiS?
If black lives matter why aren’t they protesting the thousands killed by Boko Haram in Africa?
Name one Arab country where its Arab citizens have more freedom than Israel?
Going to Emory, I sometimes find it hard to find enough students that share my unquestioning love for Israel. I totally agree with this article. Criticizing the Israeli government is totally mean and mad un-chill. Going on Birthright gave me a really good perspective of the world and I became self actualized and understood everything about the conflict upon my arrival. I tots met like 4 Israeli dudes and they were super nice so there’s no way that any of the stuff these random organizations like the UN and Amnesty International are saying is true. Like what even is the UN? I’ve never heard of them.
Thanks Melanie.
Responding to Brown Shirts is a thankless business so your support is nice to hear.
This sounds like a bunch of bigotry to me because I notice how you do not acknowledge things such as the fact that Christians like in Israel in an effort to attack Arabs lol. Classic…….
2) No one ever said anything was taken away from the Arabs or anything about that (again, taking stuff that isn’t there) unless you are concerned over anyone mentioning the settlements? In which case, based upon your claim, anything other than the area “given to the Jews” (needless to say, any land given or designated for a single group is bound to cause problems, even if internationally supported. Note how the makeshift countries in the middle east and Africa turned out….very similar with two or more ethnic groups at each others’ throats. And this is what happens when dividing lines are made with no particular preference in mind). may be considered kind of over-reaching or dislocating in nature. To me, that is kind of concerning. So naturally, that caused problems, what a shock! And then also one cannot make progress on this issue of having some level of comfort for both sides because of sentiments like many of the ones being expressed here that essentially say “Arabs are useless and Hamas is bad”
3) They (Arafat, nor you) do not have to do with this issue because it does not address the whether or not someone is allowed to express disdain or concern for an issue that affects them even if it makes them feel uncomfortable. Both of your posts merely are completely supportive of one side and anti the other (the fact that Arabs/Palestinians keep getting attacked as contributing nothing to society makes this evident). You folks are simply attacking a group of people and generalizing them. But do go on……keep attacking like that, it pretty much just proves me right. You never cited legit evidence either. I can go find primary source documents that show various policies and and peace negotiations and one may notice how some of these issues were very delicate (by how the legislative/”peace” accord danced around them, but nonetheless did address them). It suggests that something was wrong, but it is almost too late to turn back the clock.
Your first point (I’m assuming, since you started with 2), is not English.
Your second point shows your lack of knowledge on the subject, since although you did not point out land divisions, this is the basis of the issue. The Palestinians believe the Israelis took their land. I’m not spending the time on whatever else you said because it’s regarding another country. Plus, it’s difficult to even understand what you were trying to say since you write at a 6th grade level.
Point three, I am not here to validate your opinion, because well, I don’t care. If you don’t have enough confidence in what you write there’s a reason. I have not given any more actual evidence because we are writing in support of this article which includes plenty. You however, claim you can find “primary source documents” but neglect to. I can no longer respond to someone who is unable to put a couple comprehensible paragraphs together. It’s clearly because 1) you are incapable and 2) you have nothing to put in them.
This is confusing….And I did not really read concerned Jew’s post BTW. Has nothing to do with my intellect. Your intellect on the other hand…..not sure. Your argument basically comes down to “Arabs suck” and “the land was given to the Jews” and thus the other side has no right to be concerned about their current situation. Oh, and also “blame Hamas”. All this is very odd to me that this issue can be simplified like that by some people, but I suppose I am too “stupid” to understand………
Wonder if an Emory Dean would worry so much a group calling for genocide of Africans just like SJP supports genocide of Jews.
The apartheid argument is nothing more than a modern blood libel. Should Emory really be welcoming a racist debate of this sort.
Very simple go on the streets of Jerusalem, any water fountains marked Arab and Jew? Do Arabs need to sit in the back of buses? An Arab Supreme Court Judge is responsible for supervising Israel’s upcoming election, how can we all that apartheid?
This is not an issue that reasonable people can disagree on. Only bigots claim Israel is an apartheid state because their real goal is to demonize and kill Jews.
Bigots need to be outed as such. Free speech gives them the right to spew their hate. It also gives every decent person the responsibility to condemn them.
The Israeli SUPREME COURT has Arabs presidng on it (Christian AND Muslim!)!
ALL Israeli citizens have VOTING rights (wherever they are in the world) & eagerly VOTED in the 17MAR15 election.
It’s why the Arab political bloc WON 13 Knesset seats that day.
ALL her citizens (incl. Muslims!) are PROTECTED from mindless MUSLIM suicide bombers by a BLAST WALL!
Israel will NEVER become an “apartheid state”, even if she’s FORCED to deport pro-JIHAD citizens!