Comments on: Omissions, half-truths, lies: Ambassador Oren in Foreign Policy http://972mag.com/omissions-half-truths-and-lies-review-of-ambassador-orens-foreign-policy-piece/40886/ Independent commentary and news from Israel & Palestine Sat, 18 May 2013 17:42:19 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.4.1 By: dogday http://972mag.com/omissions-half-truths-and-lies-review-of-ambassador-orens-foreign-policy-piece/40886/comment-page-1/#comment-96037 dogday Wed, 05 Dec 2012 20:42:08 +0000 http://972mag.com/?p=40886#comment-96037 Any scholar, and most any lay person, who has read Oren's book about 1967 knows very well that he is no historian or scholar. It is a travesty of lies and distortions. Oren is exactly what he looks like -- an empty-headed blank faced fool of no accomplishment. On the bright side, it was the foolishness of his book that led me to activism against the Zionist state. Any scholar, and most any lay person, who has read Oren’s book about 1967 knows very well that he is no historian or scholar. It is a travesty of lies and distortions. Oren is exactly what he looks like — an empty-headed blank faced fool of no accomplishment. On the bright side, it was the foolishness of his book that led me to activism against the Zionist state.

]]> By: dogday http://972mag.com/omissions-half-truths-and-lies-review-of-ambassador-orens-foreign-policy-piece/40886/comment-page-1/#comment-96035 dogday Wed, 05 Dec 2012 20:37:01 +0000 http://972mag.com/?p=40886#comment-96035 Israel was colonized by Europeans mainly, people with "Western" educations. Israel is also subsidized on a permanent basis by both public and private sources, including extraordinary US Aid. Israel continues to thrive on subsidies and plundering of other peoples property and rights. Germany, also, provided much technology and wisdom to the world: Should we overlook the Holocaust because of these valuable contributions? Israel was colonized by Europeans mainly, people with “Western” educations. Israel is also subsidized on a permanent basis by both public and private sources, including extraordinary US Aid. Israel continues to thrive on subsidies and plundering of other peoples property and rights. Germany, also, provided much technology and wisdom to the world: Should we overlook the Holocaust because of these valuable contributions?

]]> By: niki http://972mag.com/omissions-half-truths-and-lies-review-of-ambassador-orens-foreign-policy-piece/40886/comment-page-1/#comment-59808 niki Fri, 04 May 2012 01:42:52 +0000 http://972mag.com/?p=40886#comment-59808 SHAME, noam ! ISRAEL, Jewish Nation, had started with a lot less than Gazan/Arab people! Zionists do much for his people & World, what do hamas / fatah for its residents & World ? Once again: RESPECT, ISRAEL! SHAME, noam !

ISRAEL, Jewish Nation, had started with a lot less than Gazan/Arab people!

Zionists do much for his people & World,
what do hamas / fatah for its residents & World ?

Once again: RESPECT, ISRAEL!

]]> By: Eitan http://972mag.com/omissions-half-truths-and-lies-review-of-ambassador-orens-foreign-policy-piece/40886/comment-page-1/#comment-58432 Eitan Thu, 26 Apr 2012 01:28:50 +0000 http://972mag.com/?p=40886#comment-58432 Omissions, half-truths and lies would be a far more appropriate title for this shameless article. The primary problem with it is the way that it is so close to the truth but dances around the edges in order to prove the author's point. Starting with the rights given to Palestinian detainees. The initial assumption is that they are all innocent and Israel is simply arresting them out of spite. Sheizif assumes that there is no good reason for closed trials of enemy combatents. He assumes that the high conviction rate comes from rubber stamps as opposed to quality police work. He assumes that the people who are in detention should not be. The prisoners do have habeus corpus. He insinuates that Palestinians haven't been able to vote or represent themselves since 1967 but that isnt true. The vast majority of Palestinians in Judea and Samaria live in areas a and b which are under PA control. They vote in PA elections and most of them don't ever see Jews. They, in all but the most extreme circumstances (suspected terror attacks and the like) are free to live their lives under the auspices of the PA. Now if we want to talk about omissions, Sheizif simply states that from 48 to 66 the Arab citizens of Israel were under martial law. First of all this is false. Certain areas with a large concentration of Arabs was put under, de facto, martial law. Arabs living in predominantly Jewish areas were not (from around the early 50s). A quick trip to wikipedia could have told him that (as could any actual reputable source). Anyway he provides no context or backstory. He neglects to mention that the war of independence was really a war between Jewish villaiges and their Arab neighbors. Many of the Arabs who stayed in Israel were enemy combatents who openly wanted to destroy the state. It is not at all unreasonable to ensure that they do not have the ability to hurt anyone within Israel. Of course, martial law went on for a very long time and it became increasingly hard to defend. At that point, led by Meir Vilner and other Jews a campaign to end this martial law succeeded in ending it. About Ahmad Tibi. Here Sheizaf does a hacket job to any semblance of journalistic integrety. The speech he gave was at an event called Palestinian Martyr Day. While Tibi did ensure to say that the Shahada to which he reffered were non-violent, the event he spoke at made no such distinction. By gracing it with his presence he implicitly gave (what he could) legitamcy to it. The fact that Tibi does not deny the holocaust is a red herring and unnecessary to the article. Are we supposed to be impressed that he does not deny the Holocaust? What a strange point to bring up. Anyway, none of this negates the primary point Oren attempted to make which was that Israel tolerates way more dissent from certain members of its parliament than other countries would. Sheizaf claims that there is a difference between calling for the end of the Jewish State and claling for a state of all its citizens. Is it not obvious that a state of all its citizens (if the majority of the citizens were not only not Jewish but anti-Jewish) would cease to be a Jewish State? Just because Raam-Taal, Balad and Hadash use the wording of "state of all its citizens" as opposed to "destruction of the Jewish state" does not mean that they do not seek it. In fact they do. About Al-Arth (a better transliteration would be, in my mind, El-Ard) Sheizaf again engages in duplicity. El-Ard was never banned as a party from participating in Israeli elections. El-Ard was banned as an organization in 1964. Elections for the 6th Knesset occured in 1965. The party was not banned and Michael Oren was telling the truth. It is like saying that Al-Qaida was banned from running in the US elections when the organization Al-Qaida is itself banned. This is an important distinction especially because he is criticizing Oren on such a pedantic point that Sheizaf should know better than to be intellectually dishonest. True, There was a challenge to the supreme court about running but the supreme court threw the case out. If Sheizaf wants to be intellectually honest he must make sure to tell the whole story. Sheizaf's part about the NGO law is hokum. Pure speculation without any merit. Of course he assumes that the reason Netanyahu shelved the law was out of self-interest. He has nothing to back this up. He conjures motivations out of thin air. Anyway, is he seriously faulting Israel for laws that it simply proposed and did not pass? What kind of commentator is he? He is angry at Israel for discussing (and ultimately not passing) a law he disagrees with. He won! and he is still using this to defame Israel. It's absurd. It's like criticizing the state of Illinois because two of its state representatives proposed separating from Chicago (forming its own state of Illinois but without Chicago). It's ludicrous. One could criticize Illinois if the law passed but it did not. Yes, the boycott bill is a bad bill but it is practically unenforceable (it was not enfored against Ahmed Tibi for example (Alex Miller said he would but never actually did)). Sheizaf proceeds to list a few more laws that he claims are undemocratic. He is wrong. The Nakba law makes sense. It doesn't stop anyone from mourning anything. It simply states that public funds should not go towards Nakba commemoration events. That is reasonable. Why should Israel fund events that lament its creation? I've heard of self-hating Jews but never self-hating countries. I'm pretty sure the communities law didn't pass (but I am not positive) but if it did it cannot be enacted because the Supreme Court already ruled in the Kaadan case that race or religion cannot be criteria for entry into a community. And the Citizenship law did break up some families. But the alternative would be a mass influx of Palestinians into Israel which could lead to a state in which Arabs comprise a majority and therefore the end of the Jewish State. If given the choice between national suicide and separating a few families it is obvious what any rational state would do. Furthermore it does not necessearily separate families. Arabs can always move to Judea and Samaria. Its just not automatically granting citizenship across the green line. About whether or not Palestinians have a vote. Sheizaf contradicts himself. He claims that the elections were not democratic because one of the parties was banned. But previously support was expressed for banning Kach and there was even criticisism that a former Kahanist (Michael Ben-Ari) was still allowed to run. If one of the parties is evil and will cancel democracy, banning it does not negate democracy, electing it does! Yes Israel has control over Judea and Samaria. But the whole point of the Oslo Accords was to end this. However the Palestinians decided against peace and chose suicide bombings and now they complain that they don't have autonomy! Every time they get more autonomy they get more violent. Before the P.A the first intifada was mostly rock throwing. After the PA was created the second intifida featured suicide bombings. After Israel ethnically cleansed Gaza of its Jews, the Gazans responded by firing rockets with the intent of killing as many civilians as possible. And the complaint is that they don't have enough autonomy!!! Obviously the current situation is not the optimal one. Everyone would prefer two states living in peace but this is ridiculous. We have to consider the alternatives. The P.A didn't even negotiate with Israel until the very end of the settlement freeze. Is this something that a true peace partner would do? With this assumption that they are not a true peace partner (which is quite clearly borne out by the history of Palestinian rejectionism (remember the PLO was founded before the "occupation" what were they trying to liberate?)) The choice becomes between two evils, continue with the status quo or withdraw and let a hostile nation that wants us dead have free reign to do as it wishes exist right next to Israel. Why should Israel hang itself? Isn't it more moral for Israel to wait until they have a partner that does not glorify terrorists (such as Amna Muna) than to give them a knife and turn their back? It would be absolutely immoral for Israel to force its citizens to suffer through more violence at the hands of crazed fanatics than to wait until the people who want to control our neighbor don't want us dead. Shaizaf finishes off with a tour-de-force comparison of Judea and Samaria to Washington D.C and uses all the ommissions and half-truths he can. In his analogy the citizens of Washington D.C have, as their stated goal, been attempting to destroy the United States for years. They have blown themselves up in crowded American malls and hijacked American busses and crashed them. They routinely lead chants of death to americans and also continuously kill their own citizens for the most backwards of tribalistic reasons such as honor killings or killing suspected collaberators. These would be the reasons that Washington would be under military control in his analogy. Does he really think that Israel enjoys being their policeman? That Israel wants to spend so much money on defense to ensure that their busses won't explode? Of course Israel wants peace. Israel has been paying the price for Arab rejectionism for 64 years. Yet instead of wallowing in self-pity as the Palestinians do, Israel has made something of itself. They have developed and grown and their economy is now one of the envies of the world along with their brilliant high-tec industry, to say nothing of defense. To sum up, for a supposedly nuanced carefully checked critique, this piece had far too much B.S, half-truths, false equivalencies and gaps in logic to be considered anything more than a satire. Omissions, half-truths and lies would be a far more appropriate title for this shameless article. The primary problem with it is the way that it is so close to the truth but dances around the edges in order to prove the author’s point. Starting with the rights given to Palestinian detainees. The initial assumption is that they are all innocent and Israel is simply arresting them out of spite. Sheizif assumes that there is no good reason for closed trials of enemy combatents. He assumes that the high conviction rate comes from rubber stamps as opposed to quality police work. He assumes that the people who are in detention should not be. The prisoners do have habeus corpus. He insinuates that Palestinians haven’t been able to vote or represent themselves since 1967 but that isnt true. The vast majority of Palestinians in Judea and Samaria live in areas a and b which are under PA control. They vote in PA elections and most of them don’t ever see Jews. They, in all but the most extreme circumstances (suspected terror attacks and the like) are free to live their lives under the auspices of the PA.
Now if we want to talk about omissions, Sheizif simply states that from 48 to 66 the Arab citizens of Israel were under martial law. First of all this is false. Certain areas with a large concentration of Arabs was put under, de facto, martial law. Arabs living in predominantly Jewish areas were not (from around the early 50s). A quick trip to wikipedia could have told him that (as could any actual reputable source). Anyway he provides no context or backstory. He neglects to mention that the war of independence was really a war between Jewish villaiges and their Arab neighbors. Many of the Arabs who stayed in Israel were enemy combatents who openly wanted to destroy the state. It is not at all unreasonable to ensure that they do not have the ability to hurt anyone within Israel. Of course, martial law went on for a very long time and it became increasingly hard to defend. At that point, led by Meir Vilner and other Jews a campaign to end this martial law succeeded in ending it.
About Ahmad Tibi. Here Sheizaf does a hacket job to any semblance of journalistic integrety. The speech he gave was at an event called Palestinian Martyr Day. While Tibi did ensure to say that the Shahada to which he reffered were non-violent, the event he spoke at made no such distinction. By gracing it with his presence he implicitly gave (what he could) legitamcy to it. The fact that Tibi does not deny the holocaust is a red herring and unnecessary to the article. Are we supposed to be impressed that he does not deny the Holocaust? What a strange point to bring up. Anyway, none of this negates the primary point Oren attempted to make which was that Israel tolerates way more dissent from certain members of its parliament than other countries would.
Sheizaf claims that there is a difference between calling for the end of the Jewish State and claling for a state of all its citizens. Is it not obvious that a state of all its citizens (if the majority of the citizens were not only not Jewish but anti-Jewish) would cease to be a Jewish State? Just because Raam-Taal, Balad and Hadash use the wording of “state of all its citizens” as opposed to “destruction of the Jewish state” does not mean that they do not seek it. In fact they do. About Al-Arth (a better transliteration would be, in my mind, El-Ard) Sheizaf again engages in duplicity. El-Ard was never banned as a party from participating in Israeli elections. El-Ard was banned as an organization in 1964. Elections for the 6th Knesset occured in 1965. The party was not banned and Michael Oren was telling the truth. It is like saying that Al-Qaida was banned from running in the US elections when the organization Al-Qaida is itself banned. This is an important distinction especially because he is criticizing Oren on such a pedantic point that Sheizaf should know better than to be intellectually dishonest. True, There was a challenge to the supreme court about running but the supreme court threw the case out. If Sheizaf wants to be intellectually honest he must make sure to tell the whole story.
Sheizaf’s part about the NGO law is hokum. Pure speculation without any merit. Of course he assumes that the reason Netanyahu shelved the law was out of self-interest. He has nothing to back this up. He conjures motivations out of thin air. Anyway, is he seriously faulting Israel for laws that it simply proposed and did not pass? What kind of commentator is he? He is angry at Israel for discussing (and ultimately not passing) a law he disagrees with. He won! and he is still using this to defame Israel. It’s absurd. It’s like criticizing the state of Illinois because two of its state representatives proposed separating from Chicago (forming its own state of Illinois but without Chicago). It’s ludicrous. One could criticize Illinois if the law passed but it did not. Yes, the boycott bill is a bad bill but it is practically unenforceable (it was not enfored against Ahmed Tibi for example (Alex Miller said he would but never actually did)).
Sheizaf proceeds to list a few more laws that he claims are undemocratic. He is wrong. The Nakba law makes sense. It doesn’t stop anyone from mourning anything. It simply states that public funds should not go towards Nakba commemoration events. That is reasonable. Why should Israel fund events that lament its creation? I’ve heard of self-hating Jews but never self-hating countries. I’m pretty sure the communities law didn’t pass (but I am not positive) but if it did it cannot be enacted because the Supreme Court already ruled in the Kaadan case that race or religion cannot be criteria for entry into a community. And the Citizenship law did break up some families. But the alternative would be a mass influx of Palestinians into Israel which could lead to a state in which Arabs comprise a majority and therefore the end of the Jewish State. If given the choice between national suicide and separating a few families it is obvious what any rational state would do. Furthermore it does not necessearily separate families. Arabs can always move to Judea and Samaria. Its just not automatically granting citizenship across the green line.
About whether or not Palestinians have a vote. Sheizaf contradicts himself. He claims that the elections were not democratic because one of the parties was banned. But previously support was expressed for banning Kach and there was even criticisism that a former Kahanist (Michael Ben-Ari) was still allowed to run. If one of the parties is evil and will cancel democracy, banning it does not negate democracy, electing it does! Yes Israel has control over Judea and Samaria. But the whole point of the Oslo Accords was to end this. However the Palestinians decided against peace and chose suicide bombings and now they complain that they don’t have autonomy! Every time they get more autonomy they get more violent. Before the P.A the first intifada was mostly rock throwing. After the PA was created the second intifida featured suicide bombings. After Israel ethnically cleansed Gaza of its Jews, the Gazans responded by firing rockets with the intent of killing as many civilians as possible. And the complaint is that they don’t have enough autonomy!!! Obviously the current situation is not the optimal one. Everyone would prefer two states living in peace but this is ridiculous. We have to consider the alternatives. The P.A didn’t even negotiate with Israel until the very end of the settlement freeze. Is this something that a true peace partner would do? With this assumption that they are not a true peace partner (which is quite clearly borne out by the history of Palestinian rejectionism (remember the PLO was founded before the “occupation” what were they trying to liberate?)) The choice becomes between two evils, continue with the status quo or withdraw and let a hostile nation that wants us dead have free reign to do as it wishes exist right next to Israel. Why should Israel hang itself? Isn’t it more moral for Israel to wait until they have a partner that does not glorify terrorists (such as Amna Muna) than to give them a knife and turn their back? It would be absolutely immoral for Israel to force its citizens to suffer through more violence at the hands of crazed fanatics than to wait until the people who want to control our neighbor don’t want us dead.
Shaizaf finishes off with a tour-de-force comparison of Judea and Samaria to Washington D.C and uses all the ommissions and half-truths he can. In his analogy the citizens of Washington D.C have, as their stated goal, been attempting to destroy the United States for years. They have blown themselves up in crowded American malls and hijacked American busses and crashed them. They routinely lead chants of death to americans and also continuously kill their own citizens for the most backwards of tribalistic reasons such as honor killings or killing suspected collaberators. These would be the reasons that Washington would be under military control in his analogy. Does he really think that Israel enjoys being their policeman? That Israel wants to spend so much money on defense to ensure that their busses won’t explode? Of course Israel wants peace. Israel has been paying the price for Arab rejectionism for 64 years. Yet instead of wallowing in self-pity as the Palestinians do, Israel has made something of itself. They have developed and grown and their economy is now one of the envies of the world along with their brilliant high-tec industry, to say nothing of defense.
To sum up, for a supposedly nuanced carefully checked critique, this piece had far too much B.S, half-truths, false equivalencies and gaps in logic to be considered anything more than a satire.

]]> By: Alon Lekah http://972mag.com/omissions-half-truths-and-lies-review-of-ambassador-orens-foreign-policy-piece/40886/comment-page-1/#comment-55709 Alon Lekah Sat, 14 Apr 2012 04:32:56 +0000 http://972mag.com/?p=40886#comment-55709 Sean Eaglewood is right - Dr Michael Oren is no "Professor". Sean Eaglewood is right – Dr Michael Oren is no “Professor”.

]]> By: Sean Eaglewood http://972mag.com/omissions-half-truths-and-lies-review-of-ambassador-orens-foreign-policy-piece/40886/comment-page-1/#comment-55678 Sean Eaglewood Fri, 13 Apr 2012 22:01:19 +0000 http://972mag.com/?p=40886#comment-55678 Oren is not a professor and never was. He is hardly a doctor (PhD). Oren is not a professor and never was. He is hardly a doctor (PhD).

]]> By: Avi Cohen http://972mag.com/omissions-half-truths-and-lies-review-of-ambassador-orens-foreign-policy-piece/40886/comment-page-1/#comment-55511 Avi Cohen Fri, 13 Apr 2012 07:33:49 +0000 http://972mag.com/?p=40886#comment-55511 The whole part with Tibi is based on the fact that most Israelis are not aware of the complex meaning that Shahid (martyr) and Shahada (martyrdom) have in Islam. What we in Israel consider to be a suicide bomber is referred to on the other side as a Shahid who died in a "amaliyya istishhadiyya" or in Arabic: عملية استشهادية The concept of Shahid is much wider than this. It can cover anyone who dies for the cause of Jihad without actively seeking his or her own death (i.e. children who are killed from Israeli missiles). For reference check out one of Hamas' websites: http://alqassam.ps/arabic/operations1.php?sub_operation=1 Anyway, I think the response above to Oren's article is good. Kol hakvod! The whole part with Tibi is based on the fact that most Israelis are not aware of the complex meaning that Shahid (martyr) and Shahada (martyrdom) have in Islam. What we in Israel consider to be a suicide bomber is referred to on the other side as a Shahid who died in a “amaliyya istishhadiyya” or in Arabic:
عملية استشهادية
The concept of Shahid is much wider than this. It can cover anyone who dies for the cause of Jihad without actively seeking his or her own death (i.e. children who are killed from Israeli missiles). For reference check out one of Hamas’ websites: http://alqassam.ps/arabic/operations1.php?sub_operation=1

Anyway, I think the response above to Oren’s article is good. Kol hakvod!

]]> By: andrew r http://972mag.com/omissions-half-truths-and-lies-review-of-ambassador-orens-foreign-policy-piece/40886/comment-page-1/#comment-55421 andrew r Thu, 12 Apr 2012 19:30:26 +0000 http://972mag.com/?p=40886#comment-55421 "Where is the independence for the Republic of Lakotah? The Lakotah Sioux declared independence in December 2008! They are a truly indigenous people, not like the ARabs who occupied the Jewish homeland in 638 AD" You might want to look up what Russell Means (A Lakota activist) has to say about that. http://www.russellmeansfreedom.com/2009/the-truth-about-palestine-and-israel/ “Where is the independence for the Republic of Lakotah? The Lakotah Sioux declared independence in December 2008! They are a truly indigenous people, not like the ARabs who occupied the Jewish homeland in 638 AD”

You might want to look up what Russell Means (A Lakota activist) has to say about that.

http://www.russellmeansfreedom.com/2009/the-truth-about-palestine-and-israel/

]]> By: jgarbuz http://972mag.com/omissions-half-truths-and-lies-review-of-ambassador-orens-foreign-policy-piece/40886/comment-page-1/#comment-55313 jgarbuz Thu, 12 Apr 2012 12:21:03 +0000 http://972mag.com/?p=40886#comment-55313 Where is the independence for the Republic of Lakotah? The Lakotah Sioux declared independence in December 2008! They are a truly indigenous people, not like the ARabs who occupied the Jewish homeland in 638 AD. Puerto Rico is not independent after 112 years of occupation. Guam and Samoa are not independent. The people in those territories cannot vote for US COngress nor the presidency. And those people recognize the right of the American state to exist, whereas the Arabs do not recognize the right of the JEwish state to exist. Israel did not go out to occupy. Israel was repeatedly attacked before 1967, and the Arabs did not create a Palestinian state from 1949 and 1967! Why didn't they? Judah and Samaria are ancient Israelite lands, and Israel must retain full control over them as long as the Arabs will not accept Israel as the rightful Jewish homeland and only then might Israel grant the Palestinians a degree of independence, to the extent ISrael's physical security will allow for it. The more the Arabs will accept and respect Jewish sovereignty, the more the Jewish state will allow for Palestinian Arab sovereignty in their section of the land. Where is the independence for the Republic of Lakotah? The Lakotah Sioux declared independence in December 2008! They are a truly indigenous people, not like the ARabs who occupied the Jewish homeland in 638 AD. Puerto Rico is not independent after 112 years of occupation. Guam and Samoa are not independent. The people in those territories cannot vote for US COngress nor the presidency. And those people recognize the right of the American state to exist, whereas the Arabs do not recognize the right of the JEwish state to exist. Israel did not go out to occupy. Israel was repeatedly attacked before 1967, and the Arabs did not create a Palestinian state from 1949 and 1967! Why didn’t they? Judah and Samaria are ancient Israelite lands, and Israel must retain full control over them as long as the Arabs will not accept Israel as the rightful Jewish homeland and only then might Israel grant the Palestinians a degree of independence, to the extent ISrael’s physical security will allow for it. The more the Arabs will accept and respect Jewish sovereignty, the more the Jewish state will allow for Palestinian Arab sovereignty in their section of the land.

]]> By: Noam Sheizaf http://972mag.com/omissions-half-truths-and-lies-review-of-ambassador-orens-foreign-policy-piece/40886/comment-page-1/#comment-55307 Noam Sheizaf Thu, 12 Apr 2012 11:27:26 +0000 http://972mag.com/?p=40886#comment-55307 @GREYTHORN: corrected, thanks. @GREYTHORN: corrected, thanks.

]]>