Dear Vincent Browne,

As a young journalist, I look to people like you to be my models of proper behavior.  It is the job of a journalist to speak truth to power, to scrutinize every word they say, and to hold them accountable.

When you called Israel a cancer, we held you accountable for it. Cancer is not a neutral term: it’s a horrifying and painful disease whose treatment cannot be halted until the disease is utterly destroyed.  You claimed your words were “infelicitous” and that though Israel may be a cancer that “didn’t mean it should be eliminated.”  You wouldn’t tolerate backtracking like that from any other authority figure, so why should we tolerate it? We can only judge you on what you say or do, and you do very little but talk.

You add insult to injury by claiming you refuse to bow to “blackmail” of criticism to retract your views.  It’s cowardly to claim being bullied when facing criticism for your own words.  The accusation of being anti-Semitic is worse than being called a cancer? Who is blackmailing you?  Who is silencing you? When you call Israel a cancer those are fighting words.  You earned your condemnation. What other sovereign country can be called a deadly disease on television without the speaker being censured for hate-speech?

Isn’t it a bit rich to decry being criticized when you yourself say you were only criticizing Israel? This is an opportunity to actually engage in the issue.  You should be relishing the opportunity to present your criticism directly to the Israeli government and have an open debate about your words.

I cannot say whether you are an anti-Semite or not: I do not know your heart. I would like to believe that you are a good person.  I would like to believe that you are someone who wants to see an end to the conflict. We have that in common.

Contact me here at Act for Israel. I am willing to set up an interview with you to discuss your views in depth, and give you a chance to explain yourself, without any threat of blackmail. In fact, I’m even willing to help you prep for it.

If you have questions about Israel, I’m willing to answer them with sources to the best of my abilities or find you people who can answer them.  Your constructive criticism would be a valuable resource and welcome in the discussion to make a better future for the region.

I don’t think Israel is a cancer. I don’t think you are a bigot. I want what we all want, a peaceful solution.

Respectfully,
Elke Weiss

The post Tell Us What You Really Think, Vincent Browne appeared first on Act for Israel.

We begin today a series entitled “A World Without Israel.” In it, we look at the ways in which Israel’s existence has enriched American lives. Our first entry is from Elke Weiss, Law Student, Grad Student, Journalist, and Blogger who will be at Comic Con this weekend

I know that given world events pop culture seems like small potatoes, but our world would be bleaker without the contributions of Israelis. For example, all of our lives would be a lot poorer without Israeli Avi Arad’s work with Marvel Comics: X-Men, Iron Man, and the Fantastic Four. Given that Comic Con is the highlight of my year, I cannot express enough of the gratitude owed to Israelis by the Geek community. The popularity and success of the Avengers movie is due in no small part to Arad.

Of course, Israelis supplying incredible entertainment to the world is not new. Israeli film producers and distributors Menahem Golan and Yoram Globus of Cannon brought us cheesy but delightful action movies like Delta Force and brilliant classics like King Solomon’s Boys which changed American media. Cannon Distributors worked with celebrities like James Cameron, Chuck Norris, and Christopher Reeve, and films such as Captain America and Spiderman owe their origins to the work of Golan and Globus.

It may surprise you to learn that Israel is on your television even when you don’t have the news on. When TV Guide named Homeland the best show of 2011, it was the topic of every water cooler conversation and friends were arranging viewing parties for it. Facebook statuses changed to “Homeland is on, DO NOT CALL” and “OMG BRODY” overnight. But few realized that this critically acclaimed darling began as an Israeli show about prisoners of war returning home. Another wildly popular show, HBO’s In Treatment, was brought to the United States by Israeli actress (and Act for Israel founding member) Noa Tishby.

In fact, the entire world without Israel would be a darker place. It would be a world without brilliant Israelis such as the irascible Sasha Baron Cohen (Borat), the clever Natalie Portman (Thor), and the beautiful Noa Tishby (Big Love). Musicians owe a great debt to Israelis like Gene Simmons of Kiss and Hillel Slovak of the Red Hot Chili Peppers, who were pioneers in the field of music. Even now, Israelis like Miri Ben Ari, Idan Raichel and Mosh Ben Ari are lighting up the stage with innovative songs.

On a final personal note, I owe much of my fierceness to Haim Saban and Shuki Levy who brought the Japanese show Mighty Morphing Power Rangers to the United States and convinced me that if I was good and kind and strong, someday an alien would pick me to become the next Pink Ranger. I remember drawing Power Rangers all over my homework and running around the backyard yelling “It’s Morphing Time” at the top of my lungs (Sorry, Mom!), filled to the brim with girl power and believing just a little bit that it might work. Power Rangers is still on the air with its seventeenth incarnation and I look forward to sharing it with my niece when she’s a bit older and less tempted to use the moves on her brother.

I love Israel for many reasons, and this is the one I’ve been dying to talk for a long time. As I watch the Avengers movie again for the tenth time, I pay tribute to Israel, an entertainment light among nations. They couldn’t have done it without her!

The post The Happiness Deficit appeared first on Act for Israel.

Last Saturday, the NYU’s New School hosted a troubling panel entitled “The Jewish-American Relationship with Israel at the Crossroads.”  The panel program explained that they were there to discuss the “possibility that increasing awareness of the conflict among the American Jewish community is creating a more critical stance towards Israel.”  This is an interesting topic and one worth discussing.  The problem was the New School’s choice of panelists: Anna Baltzer, Noam Chomsky, Norman G. Finklestein and Adam Shatz.  They all share extremely negative views on Israel.  Anna Baltzer works with the vehemently anti-Israel International Solidarity Organization, Noam Chomsky and Norman Finklestein are both on record as anti-Zionists, and Adam Shatz writes for “Israeli Occupation Archive.”  Is it too much to ask for the organizers to invite a pro-Israel panelist?

This one-sided discussion damages the New School’s credibility. Why deprive the audience of both sides of the issue?  What are they afraid of the audience hearing?  I want to say it was an honest mistake, but what other issue would have four panelists who agree with each other without a single dissenting voice?  Why the effort to ignore any views to the contrary?  In a similar but more violent vein the distinguished Arab-Israeli diplomat Ishmael Khaldi was shouted down and prevented from speaking at the University of Edinburgh. Again, there was no attempt at dialogue.  These students were silencing the debate, because they did not want a frank exchange of ideas.

There is only one reason to silence someone and that is to dehumanize them.  Once Israel is marginalized to the point where she is beyond defense, where she has no right to an opinion, then it’s easier to advocate for her destruction.  It is a lot easier to argue against Israel when she cannot fight back.  This type of intellectual censorship is noxious at best, despicable at worst.

American Supreme Court Justice Louis Brandeis said that “Sunlight is the best disinfectant.” A true place of learning puts all views in public and let the people decide for themselves!  But of course he would say that: he went to Harvard, whose motto is “Veritas,” or “Truth.”  Other universities would do well to learn from that.

The post Dishonest Discussions Drown out the Silence appeared first on Act for Israel.

In what likely is a cosmic joke, Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, President of Iran will be addressing the UN on the holiest day of the Jewish calendar, Yom Kippur. Likely, it’s just a complete accident and the irony is lost on Iran. If the day was chosen as an insult, it only shows the cowardice of the Iranian delegation, who wish to spew their lies freely without the Israeli delegation refuting it.  They have chosen a day where protests will be limited, and they do it because they know that the UN has something that Iran does not: freedom of speech.

Already, the Iranian leadership’s libels are heinous. “The Islamic Republic of Iran will pay for anybody who can research and find one single Zionist who is an addict. They do not exist. This is the proof of their involvement in drugs trade,” Vice President Mohammad-Reza Rahimi said in a conference in June.  He also argued that the Talmud “teaches to destroy everyone who opposes the Jews.”  We doubt anything said on Yom Kippur will be better. No one wants a war with Iran, but defamation, blood libels, and hate speech cannot be ignored when backed by nuclear weapons.

This Yom Kippur, while they are being libeled, Jews will unite in solidarity to repent for sins and strive to become better people. Prayers will be said for the freedom of all oppressed people, including the people of Iran who are shackled by a murderous dictatorship, and force-fed hate. The Supreme Judge hears the cries of the oppressed, and He will answer them.

This Yom Kippur, we at Act For Israel send our prayers, good wishes and camaraderie to the people of Iran.
We stand with women who are forced to endure gender apartheid.
We stand with activists who are brutally punished for speaking out.
We stand with the exiles who are denied the right to see their families.
And we stand with the democratic movement in Iran, one that guarantees peace and prosperity for its people and not nuclear war.

The post We Stand appeared first on Act for Israel.

Election years tend to divide all of us down party lines.  Independents—like me—end up having to choose the least problematic candidate.  For most of us, that means that we focus on a few specific issues that represent “red lines” which we will not cross.  One of my red lines is Israel.  What’s sad is that I should not have to worry about Israel.  No matter which candidate I vote for, I should not have to doubt the candidate’s commitment to one of our closest allies. This is why I was so troubled to see the Democrats’ remove language towards Israel and why I was happy to see it restored.

No matter what we believe individually, we must know Israel is a country that shares our values of freedom of speech, religion, and equality before the law. In both countries, the government is answerable to the people.  Just as important as our ethical ties is the fact that—in a world where terrorism is a real and present threat—Israel has supports us. The American people know this, (with 72% agreeing “Israel can be counted on as a loyal U.S. ally”) but sometimes our politicians seem to forget.  Israelis feel that they can count on us as well.  When there is clearly so much warmth between our countries it is disturbing to see Israel become a partisan issue.

The DNC was right to make clear that “President Obama and the Democratic Party maintain an unshakable commitment to Israel’s security,” although I admit that the booing was a bit scary.  The Republican platform was also very reassuring;  “we envision two democratic states – Israel with Jerusalem as its capital and Palestine – living in peace and security.”

I applaud both parties for making it clear that they are committed to Israel’s security and prosperity.  That is something that should be a given and should not be a political issue. The American people have spoken: Israel is our friend and ally.

Thank you to both parties for making my decision much harder, but assuring me that no matter what lever I pull, I’m pulling with Israel.

The post Israel and the American Political Parties appeared first on Act for Israel.

Suspicious incidents? Sounds more like being kicked out and made into refugees.  Perhaps Ms. Ashrawi has not heard of an incident in 1941 called the Farhud in which Iraqi rioters attacked the Jewish community celebrating Shavout. Around 180 Jews were murdered, 600 more were injured, and there were widespread reports of rape. Looting destroyed 1,500 homes. The incident was so suspicious that the attacks only stopped when the Iraqi army arrived. It is sad that Jews could no longer feel safe in a country that they had lived in for a thousand years—where the Talmud itself was written.

We might also call to attention the Jews of Yemen who were terrorized by the government. In 1922, Jewish orphans under twelve could be forcibly removed from their communities and made to convert to Islam, regardless of their personal choice. In 1947, Yemeni Jews were subjected to violent riots that killed 82 people and economically destroyed one of the largest Jewish communities in Aden. A year later, a blood libel led to another pogrom. Yemeni Jews were not encouraged to emigrate: Israel had to evacuate them for their own safety. The biblical Judean community of Yemen is no more.

This was by no means rare.  Even before the establishment of Israel there were pogroms throughout the middle east.  From 1948 to 1951 hundreds of thousands of Arabs left Israel.  A similar number of Jews left Arab countries and emigrated to Israel.  Israel was a refuge from oppression: it is and was a homeland where all Jews are welcome.  Those Arabs who stayed in Israel (approximately 20% of the population) are also welcomed as citizens.  That the Jewish refugees are no longer refugees but citizens of their own country speaks volumes.  The Palestinians—a people who are not ethnically or racially distinct from other Arab groups—languish in camps because their Arab neighbors shun them.  The Palestinians, like the Jews, were displaced by war, but the Jews accommodated a changing world.  The Palestinians could not—not because of Israel, but because the other countries marginalize them.  Ms. Ashrawi would do well to remember this.

The post Hanan Ashrawi Highlights the Hypocrisy of the Palestinian Plight appeared first on Act for Israel.

Today, the Haifa district court ruled that the death of Rachel Corrie was an unfortunate accident. I respectfully disagree with the verdict. While I do not blame the bulldozer operator for the tragedy, I do blame the people who willingly and knowingly put Rachel Corrie and other civilians into a military zone during the intifada.

Cindy Corrie said today “As a family, we’ve had to push for answers, accountability and justice,” but she seems to have neglected one party. The International Solidarity Movement (ISM), the organization who trained Corrie and facilitated her entry into Rafah, has blood on its hands. They admitted that “the level of risk dramatically increased in the April ISM campaign with internationals on the receiving end of shrapnel, live fire over their heads, tear-gassing, rubber bullets, sound bombs, beatings, interrogations, arrests and deportations. Without sounding crass, the benefits were many and obvious.” In other words, ISM knew that they were putting people at risk and saw it as a “benefit.” Should anyone be shocked that a year later, Rachel Corrie paid the price for the stupidity of sending civilians into a war zone?

Bill Van Esveld of Human Rights Watch, may lament that “the idea that there can be no fault for killing civilians in a combat operation flatly contradicts Israel’s international legal obligations to spare civilians from harm during armed conflict, and to credibly investigate and punish violations by its forces,” but he neglects to mention that this obligation is for civilians who are unwillingly caught in the crossfire, not those who come to stand in the crossfire. Shame on ISM for putting them there!

This is not about Palestinian rights. It is about making Israel look bad.  In May of 2003, two months after Rachel’s death, ISM spokesman Raphael Cohen defined the “occupation” as “the Zionist presence in Palestine.” Raphael Cohen and ISM shamefully used Rachel’s death to promote their cause while ignoring the Palestinians and Israelis dying in combat at the same time.

What is more sickening is that the International Solidarity Movement is a 501c3 organization of charity, even though it preaches violence and provides assistance to terrorists. As co-leaders Huwaida Arraf and Adam Shapiro said in an interview in the Palestine Chronicle “The Palestinian resistance must take on a variety of characteristics – both nonviolent and violent. …No other successful nonviolent movement was able to achieve what it did without a concurrent violent movement.”

So why haven’t the Corries sued ISM? Why haven’t they demanded that ISM’s charitable classification be revoked until they actually behave like a charity, without advocating violence? It may be easy to follow the romantic narrative of a beautiful young volunteer, laying her life down for a cause. The Corries want to believe that Israel is at fault, because otherwise they would have to admit that their daughter willingly and naively put herself between a bulldozer in a war zone, and therefore, put herself in harm’s way to save a house.

Rachel Corrie deserves justice; she deserves to have the organization that used her life and death as a public relations piece in order to better demonize Israel. If the Corries want justice and accountability, the International Solidarity Movement has a lot to answer for.

The post Justice for Rachel appeared first on Act for Israel.

On Sunday, Israeli forces thwarted a terrorist attempt on its borders when fifteen innocent Egyptian soldiers were murdered by Islamist gunmen who stole a vehicle to try to invade Israeli sovereignty.  As evidenced by the callous disregard for their fellow Muslims, the terrorists have sent a message. No one is safe.

Many in the Arab world wish to blame terrorism on Israel, and some even tacitly endorse murderous parties like Muslim Brotherhood and Hamas. Sunday’s mission should be a stark reminder that next on the Islamist list of targets are anyone else who stands in their way to power.  If any government official refuses to kowtow to one man’s interpretation of faith, they could be next on the chopping block.  According to news reports, Israel and Egypt have been working together to get to the source of this terrorist plot.

If anything good can come out of this, let it be more cooperation between Israel and Egyptian moderates. After all, they both have pretty similar goals.  They both want a stable country, with a productive economy that will allow the people to have normal lives.  Both sides are under the risk of terror, and as neighbors who share a border; both countries can help protect each other. So the question for Egyptians is, do you hate Israel more than you love your country?

In fact, this goes beyond terrorism. Egypt has a lot of other benefits with a friendship with Israel. Egypt’s economy is burdened by 40% of the budget going to military ventures, and years of corruption and high unemployment have dredged down what could be a thriving government.  Israel is a well-regarded, advanced economy that could be an incredible partner to help stimulate the Egyptian GDP.  Imagine the exchange of goods and services, not to mention the exchange of culture through joint scholarship.  The possibilities for mutual gain are endless.

Closer to my heart, a peaceful Egypt with good relations with Israel would also mean more tourism dollars. I for one would love to go to Luxor to see the mummies and the pyramids but fear taking my life into my hands as a Jewish woman of Israeli ancestry. While I do know there is some travel between the countries, I’m sure Israelis would love to be able to fly short trips to see the wonders of the ancient world, the way the English do on short jaunts to France.

Most importantly, Egypt as a friend to Israel can help be a strong partner for peace by putting pressure on the Palestinians to end their fruitless campaign to destroy Israeli sovereignty.  They can help repatriate Palestinian refugees and help bridge the gap between other Muslim countries. This would be a tremendous source of prestige to a country that is currently thought of in world opinion as lawless and chaotic.

An Arab proverb states that when one seeks revenge or evil, one should dig a grave for oneself as well. Contributing to terror in the world will only backlash violently and create more suffering. A new proverb for the future:

When seeking good, build bridges.

Israel is waiting.

The post When You Seek Revenge, Dig Two Graves appeared first on Act for Israel.

After my last post about conversations I would like to stop having on Israel, I considered conversations that the mainstream audience is not having on Israel.

The British Ambassador to Israel, Matthew Gould said this week that there is a “growing concern” in the United Kingdom that Israel isn’t doing enough to achieve progress in the peace talks with Palestinians. He cites settlement explanation and the blockade on Gaza as Israel being unwilling to be a full partner in peace.

Ambassador Gould, there is one question that I want to ask. Why is Israel being told to negotiate with a partner that wants the annihilation of the state?  Why is Israel being told to negotiate with a partner focused on genocide?

Hamas says in Article Seven of its charter:

[Hamas] aspires to the realization of Allah’s promise, no matter how long that should take. The Prophet, Allah bless him and grant him salvation, has said: The Day of Judgement will not come about until Moslems fight the Jews (killing the Jews), when the Jew will hide behind stones and trees. The stones and trees will say O Moslems, O Abdulla, there is a Jew behind me, come and kill him.

Notice that the word Israeli is not used; this is every single Jewish person. It includes Jewish Voice for Peace, Neturai Karta, and other Jews who hate the state of Israel. This is a call for genocide, against innocent people who follow a religion. Why Israel should do anything but ignore and thwart such a terrorist group is beyond me.

Why isn’t the fact that Hamas wants every Jewish person dead discussed whenever the topic of peace talks comes up? Why aren’t people calling for Palestinians to disavow talks of murder and talk peace?

Israel could forcibly uproot every single settlement; end the blockade on Gaza and it still would not be enough for Hamas. It is not hard to read their motives, Hamas states it openly. They want to finish Hitler’s work and kill everyone Jewish, men, women and children, regardless of politics, religious observance or location.  But Gould goes on:

The centre ground, the majority, the British public may not be expert, but they are not stupid and they see a stream of announcements about new building in settlements, they read stories about what’s going on in the West Bank, they read about restrictions in Gaza. The substance of what’s going wrong is really what’s driving this.

The British public is not stupid, but they are missing a key part in the conversation. All of those restrictions are happening because Hamas wants Israel gone. Settlements beyond the Green Line would only be a problem if Hamas didn’t consider settlements to be any Jewish life in part of the Holy land.

We need to have a conversation about peace as a realistic process and not just an ideal. Israel would only benefit from having peace. The country could stop sending their children off to war, and could allow them to pursue higher education at a younger age. A downgrading of security would be a welcome change in a country where you cannot even enter a mall without having your purse searched.

Maybe the British public needs to hear about the terrorist group really driving this conflict. Why aren’t there streams of announcements about rockets, suicide bombings or genocide? The question is, why isn’t the BBC covering Hamas’s true motives?

The silence is as deadly as it is deafening.

The post A Conversation We Need to Have on Israel, Part 2 appeared first on Act for Israel.

Working in Hasbara often becomes very repetitive as I am forced to debunk the same myths ad infinitum. Therefore, in the interests of brevity, I have picked the four of the ones that annoy me the most and have put my new elevator pitch that I have prepared and will be using in the future.

• Boycott, Divestment and Sanctions activists are actually pro-Israel, they are using non-violent means of pressuring Israel to make peace.

If only that was true. BDS sites all openly claim to support the Palestinian right of return and are “neutral” to the one state solution. Even Norman Finkelstein–who is no friend of Israel–admitted that the entire movement is a hoax and that they do not recognize Israel’s right to exist, even within the Green Lines. Al Awda, one such organization has a picture of the entire state of Israel as Palestine. In other words, they don’t want to pressure Israel to change policy. They want to put pressure on the world to eliminate Israel.

That is not to say that it’s a bad thing to want to change Israeli policy. If you want to pressure Israel to change, become a citizen and vote like everyone else. That’s the beauty of a democracy.

• Palestinians are suffering, do you care?

Of course I care. I care deeply that innocent people are warehoused into refugee camps because they are political footballs in the hands of governments who have no interest in getting them repatriated out of the refugee camps.

The question is, why don’t you put pressure on Arab governments to give citizenship to Palestinian refugees living in their countries, so that they can move on with their lives? Or better yet, why don’t you call on the UN to investigate why Palestinians remain refugees for more than a half-century, living on the world’s dime. In fact, you might want to also demand accountability from Hamas and Fatah, who are making the Palestinians suffer immensely.

Or do you only care about Palestinians when it’s useful against Israel?

• Settlements are the source of the problem.

To quote the honorable Ambassador Ron Prosor, settlements may be a thorn in the side of Palestinians but they are not the barriers to peace.  Mainstream media likes to show settlers as gun-toting religious fundamentalists, but many ‘settlements” are built up areas of Israel, including parts of the capital. They are now part of Israel and that’s not likely to change in the near future. Israel has withdrawn from Gaza and has forcibly removed its own citizens.

So what is the barrier to peace? The right of return and the refusal to recognize that Israel is not going anywhere. It’s hard to have productive negotiations when you are busy plotting the end of your partner.

• Just go back to ’67 borders and there will be peace.

I understand why this is an attractive thought. Basically, it’s a land dispute and if Israel just gave back the land they stole, everyone can sit down and sing, “Michael rowed the boat ashore.” The only problem is that Israel didn’t steal the land, and it’s not a land dispute.

Israel was attacked in ’67 and miraculously survived six armies threatening to bulldoze the country into the Mediterranean. Israel won and Jordan and Syria lost territory. Whether or not that becomes part of a future Palestinian state can only be determined through negotiations and mutual acceptance of each other’s sovereignty.

Now, can we move on to more productive conversation?

The post Four Conversations I am Tired of Having on Israel: Part 1 appeared first on Act for Israel.