Comments by sb2ny
Page 1 of 1
Posted on November 20 at 8:33 p.m.
I want to apologize to Info for lumping him/her in with what I termed the hate-filled diatribe of Send2Shepherd.
Reading Info's posts more carefully, I realize I was mistaken. There is lots of anger in his/her comments, but not hate. I think maybe Info is actually a little like me - he/she has a strong point of view, but is also interested in understanding other sides of the story. I am truly sorry I mistook him/her for the likes of Adonis_Tate (the previous poster) and Send2Shepherd, whose comments regurgitate the familiar thems of classic anti-Semitism, and to me seem truly vile and hate-filled.
As for the nature of the Teach-in on Israel, I think it's telling that of the six non-fiction books on our recommended reading list, one of the titles' was Sari Nusseibeh's ONCE UPON A COUNTRY: A PALESTINIAN LIFE, for which I provided the following description:
"Rabbi Arthur Gross-Schaefer is fond of saying that an enemy is someone whose story we have not yet heard. Sari Nusseibeh tells his story in a way that reflects his own determination to understand the Israeli narrative as well. In the end, Nusseibeh argues, Israelis and Palestinians must come to recognize that they are natural allies, utterly dependent upon one another in order to achieve the peace that both sides desperately desire."
The purpose of the Teach-in really was educational, not polemical. The organizers of the event all support Israel's absolute right to exist, but we don't have a company line. None of us vilify the Palestinians, or attempt to reduce the conflict to a simple Us vs. Them scenario. We do all share the value that discourse about the Arab-Israeli conflict needs to be fact-based, and respectful. The facts are complex, some of them are unpalatable, and we all need to learn more about the situation.
The question I'm asking myself is how a community event that was simply educational in nature could provoke the degree of vitriol evinced by some of the recent postings in this column.
Posted on November 19 at 3:59 p.m.
The Teach-in on Israel was an attempt to study the complexities of Israel and the Arab-Israeli conflict in an honest way that eschews anything resembling a Good Guys vs. Bad Guys mentality.
As on of the event's organizers, I feel that Ben Preston's article did a good job of conveying the spirit of learning and open-mindedness that permeated the day. I have to assume, therefore, that the mere fact that a bunch of people came together to study the situation in Israel was enough to provoke the hate-filled diatribes of the first three comments in this thread.
As a Jew, I can't help but find this kind of virulent anti-Israel sentiment kind of disturbing.
Sincerely,
Peter Melnick
Posted on August 16 at 2:23 p.m.
Moreover, georgehale, 12 Arab Israeli members of the Knesset out of 120 constitutes TEN percent, not one percent, of the Knesset. We all make mistakes with the "zeros" column, but one ought to take more care when using statistics to indict a country.
It's also worth pointing out that in America, where women comprise about half of the electorate, they comprise only 16 % of our senators (16 senators out of 100) and 16% of the House of Representatives (70 out of 435 seats in the house), according to the Center for American Women in Politics. Perhaps when it comes to representation, statistics don't tell the whole story. But the right to vote is paramount.
Posted on August 14 at 9:55 a.m.
I love that Yeats poem, but I did not get to know it until my freshman year at college. Hats off to you, and to your high school English teacher.
I fear you miss my point, however. The trouble with Aizenstadt's Voices piece is that is filled with unsubstantiated assertions that the author attempted to bolster, not with facts, but by reference to his own family background, his undergraduate studies and his own limited anecdotal experience during a recent visit to Israel and the Palestinian territories. No one can quarrel with personal experience - Aizenstadt saw what he saw, and for whatever it's worth, he knows what he knows. But it's no good flinging around terms like "apartheid state," for example, without grounding them in fact-based analysis. And the charge that Israel is an apartheid state flies in the face of the significant number of Arab Israelis sitting in the Knesset, evidence of Israel's deep-seated commitment to democracy and the rule of law.
Indeed, H, it would be better if you, too, confined yourself to arguing the facts, rather than resorting to ad hominem attacks on those with whom you disagree.
Peter Melnick
Posted on August 10 at 5:43 p.m.
The first poster in this series of comments, "jqb," should exercise greater care in flinging around the accusation that Ami Cohen and I are "haters of Palestinians and Arabs." What a terribly damaging, hurtful thing to write, and utterly without substantiation. As anyone who knows me will attest, my understanding of the Palestinian-Israeli conflict begins with the premise that both peoples have legitimate claims on the land, and that the only way forward is through a willingness to compromise. And as a board member of the Santa Barbara ADL, I am as committed to speaking out against hate speech and racism directed at Muslims as I am ready to speak out against anti-Semitism. I believe whole-heartedly in the rights of the Palestinians to a homeland, and I advocate strongly for a two-state solution. You want to argue with my letter, fine. You want to disagree with my views, great - just be sure you have taken the trouble to discern what those views are before you start throwing punches. But when you accuse me of harboring a racist hatred of Palestinians or other Arabs, you cross a line.
Peter Melnick
Posted on August 9 at 10:21 a.m.
Sorry, Jesse, but I don't buy it. It's just silly to equate the statement "sometimes silence is worth gold" with an insidious hush campaign. But to be clear: I defend to the death your right to be just silly.
I do hope, however, that your ongoing UC education helps helps you to develop a more rigorously analytical approach, if you intend to carry on weighing in on the Palestinian-Israeli conflict. Your Voices piece is full of passionate intensity (cf. Yeats' "The Second Coming"), but your arguments are absolutist and largely unsupported by fact. The Palestinian-Israeli conflict is hugely complex, and no one side has a lock on righteousness, or on suffering. Any time you find yourself reducing the players to Good Guys and Bad Guys, it's time to rethink your position. IMHO.
Peter Melnick
Page 1 of 1
Previous Month
Posted on January 26 at 9:21 a.m.
To EastBeach,
Your desire to study the Israeli-Palestinian conflict and to get beyond simplistic assessments of this painfully complex situation is laudable. A great starting point for studying the history of the early 20th century (and the latter third of the 19th) roots of the conflict is RIGHTEOUS VICTIMS, Benny Morris' seminal history. The very title of this book expresses a commitment to grappling with the narratives of both sides in the conflict. Reading it left me with the feeling that there are rights and wrongs enough to go around on both sides, but that the critical issue is finding a way forward toward a stable peace.
More than ever, that goal mandates a two-state solution, for which both sides will need to make painful compromises. The alternative is too horrible to contemplate, for the sakes of Israelis and Palestinians alike.
On Two Upset About Gaza