Reader Rupa Shah passes along an article by Uri Yablonka from Maariv which has this to say about the appointment of Israel critic, Professor Richard Falk to be Occupied Territories rapporteur for the world body’s Human Rights Council:
It is not every day that the Foreign Ministry decides to ban a senior United Nations emissary from entering Israel, especially when the person involved is a Jewish academic. But in the case of Prof. Richard Falk from the United States, Israel made an exception. This was because in the past Falk voiced support for suicide attacks and compared Israel’s activity with that of the Nazis.
Whenever you read such a bald-faced statement as this it’s a good idea to treat it with more than a grain of salt. In fact, a truckload would be best in this particular case. Of course, Falk has never supported suicide attacks. There is no evidence to support such a contention and it is a deliberate distortion of his record. But in their desperate need to smear the name of their perceived enemies Israel gets out the big guns and attempts to mow them down. And why use a .22 caliber when a howitzer shell would do? That seems to be the prevailing attitude.
Other critics of Falk who are slightly less mendacious like Israeli UN ambassador Levanon spoke in opposition to Falk’s appointment saying:
“He has taken part in a UN fact-finding mission which determined that suicide bombings were a valid method of ‘struggle’.
Even here you’ll note that there is no reference to which mission and no direct attribution of the accusation to Falk himself. Did Falk say this? Or did he sign a document which said this? I strongly doubt it. But the onus should be on the party who makes the claim to authenticate it and Israel has not done so.
In fact, Falk has made strong statements condemning violence on both sides of the conflict. Thanks to reader Agape in the comment thread below who pointed out this reference to a Falk article about terrorism in The Nation:
The point here is not in any way to excuse Palestinian suicide bombers and other violence against civilians, but to suggest that when a struggle over territory and statehood is being waged it can and should be resolved at the earliest possible point by negotiation and diplomacy, and that the violence on both sides tends toward the morally and legally impermissible.
At the very least Ambassador Levanon is a sloppy propagandist. At worst, he’s a liar.
Has Falk made strong criticisms of Israel? Yes. Have those criticisms been any stronger than those of a good number of Israelis themselves? Not really. So why is Israel getting its knickers in a knot over someone like Falk? Because he has an international reputation and following. Because the attack on him allows Israel to carry forward the narrative of Israeli victimization at the hands of the UN. Knowing it will be called on yet again to defend the indefensible (the Occupation), Israel turns the tables on the accuser in order to deflect the attack.
In truth, Israel is afraid of Falk. Similarly it refused entry to Desmond Tutu, the Nobel laureate because it was afraid of the international following he had and the powerful impact his criticism would have in the world community.
The Yablonka article was translated from Hebrew. I’m trying to get the original to confirm the accuracy of the translation. But I have no reason to doubt its accuracy.
Good article.
Perhaps more sources on Falk needed.
Richard Falk is proponent of divestment from Israel. And has said that wiping out that sedar in Netanya that was full of holocaust survivors was not any worse than operation defensive shield. Which was launched in response to a constant run of suicide bombing. what say you?
Bill: I’d like to see the actual comment Falk made before commenting on it. Do you have a link?
April 18 – A rally was held at Princeton University in support of divestment from Israel. In a statement published on the rally organizers Web site, Richard Falk, a recently retired Albert Milbank Professor of International Law and Practice at Princeton, and member of the U.N. Human Rights Commission team that seeks to investigate alleged human rights violations in the “occupied territories,” called on University officials to “divest from companies profiting from business with Israel at this time… to express solidarity with victims of massive crimes against humanity and to call upon Israel to respect UN authority and the elemental rules of international law by withdrawing from occupied Palestinian territory.”
Wasn’t Israel supposed to be open to all Jews? I guess there are Jews and then there are Jews whose consciences drive them to speak out when they see Israel going astray. These Jews are decidedly not welcome in Israel.
Another unwelcome Jew is Starhawk, who was rexcently denied entry, arrested, jailed and deported from Israel. She had gone there with the intention of “teaching and learning from Green organizations, after being invited by three Israeli groups to present my work in permaculture and ecological design, and to learn from the innovative work they are doing.” Israel’s welcome mat was rolled up after she spent time working with Israeli and international peace activists in Palestine.
The following link is to her report of this experience and of her Jewish upbringing and background:
http://newsweek.washingtonpost.com/onfaith/starhawk/2008/04/denied_entry_into_israel.html
Thanks for that link, Mary.
Starhawk was a huge influence on me for her pagan teachings many years ago. Then I heard about her work with ISM and was so glad that her path took her on these steps.
But I had not heard anything about her for a couple of years.
ellen
I have heard that ISM says it is a “peace movement”. However, I saw a picture of Rachel Corrie burning an American flag with a crowd of Arab children celebrating around it. I thought “peace activists” were people trying to bring “international understanding”. How is burning an American flag going to bring “understanding” between Palestinians and Americans?
“Never has this been truer than with respect to the horrifying Passover bombing at Netanya and the equally horrifying Israeli incursion with tanks and helicopters throughout occupied Palestine.” Here is the linf for that comment http://www.thenation.com/doc/20020429/falk
‘right of resistance does not permit unrestricted violence, but it certainly would seem to legitimize some armed activities. It puts in a different light the furor raised in January by the intercepted arms shipment that was evidently intended for Palestinian use. Should the opposition, in the context of the sort of struggle that has gone on for decades, have no right to gain the means of self-help while the occupying power can arm itself to the teeth, all the while denying international accountability and refusing UN authority?’
This is direct apologetics of Palestinian terror against Israel. Why should Israel government accept a person who try to justify and legitimize terror against it as a “right of resistance”?
No state is supposed to be open to those who hate it and try to demonize, delegitimize and destroy it.
Please inform me of the following:
Did Falk equate the state of Israel’s actions to that of the Nazi’s? If so, how could you think that he is impartial. Further, he is exceptionally insensitive if he said this and intellectually dishonest as such a comparison is purile.
For all interested in Tikun Olam:
Let me express my belief that world would be a better place without Prof. Falk, supporter of Holocost denying virulent antisemit Ward Churchill, Norman Finkelstein and other scum of humanity:
http://wardchurchill.net/blog/2006/11/06/professor-richard-falk-calls-for-a-robust-defense-of-academic-freedom/
Herr Professor always find excuses for the most odious persons, from terrorists to Nazi fellow-travelers. The only people in the world who, in his opinion, has not right to “resistanse” or self-defence, is Jewish people.
“Why should Israel government accept a person who try to justify and legitimize terror against it as a “right of resistance”?”
I wonder whether you believe that the Palmach had a right to buy arms in its efforts to defend the yishuv before independence was declared in 1948. If you do, then you are being inconsistent in disallowing the Palestinians fr. doing the same thing. And btw, the U.S. AND Israel have subsequently armed the PA at various stages. Why was it wrong to allow the Palestinians to arm themselves then but it’s OK for them to arm themseelves now when we hope the PA will fight Hamas rather than Israel?
“The only people in the world who, in his opinion, has not right to “resistanse” or self-defence, is Jewish people.”
That’s not what Falk believes. And if you ever use the word “scum” here again in describing someone you don’t like you’ll be banned.
We here in Israel are continually dumbfounded by the blind spot of our critics, as if to absorb thousands of rockets on a daily basis is trivial and permissable. We also see how quickly our critics go from referring to us as “Israelis” to calling us “Jews” – with a hint of, if not blatant, you-know-what – and not realizing for a moment that Israeli society is comprised of other cultures. My Arab neighbors in Lod seem to be doing okay with Israel’s operation to remove the THUGS running Gaza.
@Sarah:
That’s thousands of rockets over a 7 year period. Isn’t that what you meant to say? Because that would be accurate & what you actually wrote would be propaganda.
No one is saying that Palestinian rockets are trivial or permissible. What we are saying is that an F-16 is a lot more lethal weapon than a Qassam.
First, you, an Israeli Jew, are speaking on behalf of your Arab neighbors. Second, you’re not even quoting them. So I’ll have to take yr anecdote as entirely questionable. Third, you expect me to assume that all, most, or even a large number of Israeli Arabs support Solid Lead because they all must believe what your Arab neighbors believe??? If that isn’t the ultimate chutzpah.
Richard,
Thanks for the correction – I did indeed mean over a long period (some say 7, some say 8).
So, are you actually saying that we can retaliate with Qassam rockets, that that would be “fair” in your opinion?
The majority of Arabs here support “Operation Cast Lead”. Those that do not have demonstrated – peacefully, I may add. They all know that Hamas is a gang of thugs.
You wouldn’t know that though because you’re like – what – a million miles away?
The sooner Falk contracts a terminal melanoma, the better place the earth will be.
The sooner your hand withers away and falls off the better off the world would be. But then again, I suppose you could learn to use your mouth to type the foul, disgusting things you write.
You’re not an “average American.” You’re a vile, ugly American.
Oh, and btw, I don’t allow commenters here to wish cancer on others. So your comment privilege is hereby revoked.