State of debate - Page 2

What a controversial panel says about the nature of Jewish discourse about Israel in the Bay Area today

Rae Abileah, shown here protesting a product created in an illegal Israeli settlement

The next year was declared by some Jewish leaders to be the Year of Civil Discourse. The Jewish Community Relations Council (JCRC), the self-described "central public affairs arm of the organized Bay Area Jewish Community," organized a year of programming and discussion, with an aim to "elevate the level of discourse in the Jewish community when discussing Israel." The J Weekly, the magazine of the Jewish Bay Area, reported that "[organizers] agree that the Year of Civil Discourse was a success," though these organizers acknowledged their work was far from over.

Indeed, the controversies rage on. Two months before the Year of Civil Discourse officially ended Dec. 13, the Museum of Children's Art in Oakland canceled an exhibit, "A Child's View from Gaza", that would have showcased drawings by Palestinian children, after pressure from Jewish organizations.

The director of the JCRC, Doug Kahn, became a spokesperson against the exhibit, butting up against groups like the Middle East Children's Alliance and Bend the Arc (formerly Progressive Jewish Alliance). In March, an event that would have featured author and journalist Peter Beinart lost support after the JCC of the East Bay learned that one of the event's moderators was on the board of Bend the Arc. Add this panel to the mix, and the six months since the Year of Civil Discourse ended have proven how taboo topics like BDS and Israeli violence in Palestine remain volatile.

BDS in particular has emerged as an untouchable issue. The campaign is a result of a 2005 Palestinian call for boycott and divestment from Israeli companies, and economic sanctions on Israel., which provides news and background information regarding BDS efforts, lists three goals to the protest: "Ending [Israel's] occupation and colonization of all Arab lands and dismantling the Wall; recognizing the fundamental rights of the Arab-Palestinian citizens of Israel to full equality; and respecting, protecting and promoting the rights of Palestinian refugees to return to their homes and properties as stipulated in UN resolution 194."

The campaign has seen effects worldwide. Abileah has organized to promote BDS, in particular working to get Bay Area stores to stop carrying Ahava, skin-care products made in what she calls an illegal Israeli settlement in Palestine.

The BDS campaign is "a tried and true nonviolent tactic to get the Israeli government to uphold international law," Abileah told me. "We decided to be in solidarity."

But some Jewish leaders feel BDS goes too far.

"The term delegitimizing Israel refers to the intent to eliminate the Jewish and democratic State of Israel by portraying it as an illegitimate nation," Kahn wrote in an email. "The boycott/divestment/sanctions movement's leadership has made clear that this is their ultimate agenda and one of the movement's explicit objectives would achieve that aim resulting in a dire threat to nearly half of the world's Jewish population that lives in Israel."

BDS is mentioned several times in the Federation funding guidelines, and stands out as the only specific example of what it means to "undermine the legitimacy of the state of Israel."



But organizations like the Federation and the JCRC aren't the only ones interested in the path that Israel-Palestine discourse among Bay Area Jews takes. The Reut Institute, a think tank based in Tel Aviv, "has been committed to responding to the assault on Israel's legitimacy since 2008," according to the introduction to its 2011 report: "San Francisco as a Delegitimization Hub."


I appreciate this thoughtful presentation of some of the issues Jews are grappling with in the Bay Area.

Our community, too, has it's 1%. Though this minority's Likud-like positions are increasingly discredited, it is fighting desperately to maintain its control over the discourse. The reflexive efforts to censor progressive views are examples of this desperation. (See the blog Muzzlewatch, devoted to reporting on these acts of censorship.)

Bend the Arc did not used to be called Jewish Voice for Peace (an admirable organization in its own right, very much alive and well, both in the Bay Area, where it was born, and now nationally). Bend the Arc used to be called the Progressive Jewish Alliance.

Posted by Lion of Judah on May. 23, 2012 @ 3:06 pm

=v= I don't know what to think on this issue until Eric Brooks lectures us on it.

Syria just massacred a bunch of children, time for a BDS movement against them?

Posted by Jym on May. 26, 2012 @ 3:05 pm

He got upset by all the jokes about the SF Green Party

Posted by Guest on May. 26, 2012 @ 4:25 pm

Unfortunately it's a lot more than that. But one definitely does get the sense that they're losing ground as more people begin to ask questions. And they're very afraid of the scrutiny, because in the end, Israel in it's current form is a mass of contradictions that doesn't withstand the scrutiny of logic and compassion.

As for Syria... I'm all for not supporting Syria. Let's stop all military aid to them as well. Oh wait... we don't give them any military aid!

Turth is, American intervention almost always makes things worse. Let Syria solve its own problems, and let Israel solve its own problems. If Israel "made the desert bloom," then I'm sure they're perfectly capable of getting by just fine without an American subsidy that works out to about $1000 per Israeli every year. Right?

Posted by Greg on May. 27, 2012 @ 8:03 am

about the middle-east.

Obsessed much, Greg?

Posted by Guest on May. 27, 2012 @ 8:31 am

What's with the whole "much" thing these days? It's the most idiotic hipster expression I've ever heard.

FYI, I was responding to another poster above who used used the term in reference to a minority of people in the Jewish community. I wasn't the one who "found a way" to insert the term. I just responded. But someone clearly decided to use any excuse, however thin, to criticize me.

Stalking much?

Posted by Greg on May. 27, 2012 @ 1:58 pm

Just couldn't resist, huh?

Whatever happened to Occupy anyway? And exactly when it did it degrade into a week-end playtime once a month or so? Wasn't it supposed to herald a revolution?

Posted by Guest on May. 27, 2012 @ 3:12 pm

After years of internal discussion, there is a pretty new consensus in the Jewish community that being critical of Israeli policies is welcome and needed. This is not our parents and grandparents Jewish community any more, but one which acknowledges how complicated the situation in the middle east is. Even young middle school children in Jewish day schools speak about their support for the Palestinians and the challenges faced by all sides.

Might there be some introspection needed by the progressives too? their idea that organizations and communities shouldn't work in their own interest seems strange. And isn't it in the interest of all of us to see this conflict resolved rather than support only one side or the other?

Posted by Guest Hannah on Jun. 05, 2012 @ 2:30 pm

The reporter didn't quite get the story of the presentation of "Rachel" by the SF Jewish Film Festival in 2009 quite right. Neither Cindy Corrie nor the film were booed. The booing and jeering were reserved for a speaker who gave a pro-Israel speech prior to the film being shown. I was that speaker, invited by the SFJFF because of community outcry about the invitation to Cindy Corrie who serves as a fundraiser for the International Solidarity Movement. You can see it for yourself at

The fact that the Jewish Film Festival had programmed an event which attracted an audience which had a distinctly anti-Israel audience (many not Jewish) is what led directly to the guidelines to prevent similar misuses of Jewish community funds.

Criticism of Israel is not the issue. Peter Beinart appeared at the SFJCC recently without any significant community protest. Jeremy Ben Ami has spoken at the Berkeley JCC and at least one Bay Area synagogue without any significant community protest.

The difference is that the BDS movement has at its core the goal of eliminating Israel entirely. It's not about the occupation, unless you also believe that Tel Aviv (founded on sand dunes in 1909) and Jerusalem (which has had a Jewish majority since 1900) is "occupied Arab land". Omar Barghouti, BDSer in chief, believes that his movement will be "euthanasia" for Zionism.

This is an important distinction. People can legitimately criticize Israel (Israelis, even Knesset members, do it all the time) without calling for its destruction. People legitimately criticized Bush for launching a war in Iraq without openly siding with al Qaeda. But when criticism of Israel is aimed at its destruction, then the Jewish community says such discussions can take place in venues outside our own institutions. After all, would an LGBT center host speakers claiming that gays can (and should) be "converted"? Did African-American cultural centers host programs defending apartheid South Africa? Of course not. So Jewish community centers aren't going to host Rae Abileah's activities that promote not peace between a Jewish state of Israel and an Arab state of Palestine, but rather ongoing war against Israel.

Posted by Michael Harris on Jun. 05, 2012 @ 4:27 pm

To Rae Abileach and so-called Jewish Voice for peace:
What does Rae and her fellow Jewish Voice for peace knows about Judaism? What do you know about Torah? Do you know how to read or chant the Torah? Do you know any Yiddish, Hebrew, Ladino or Arabic? Let me tell you what a Torah says. I suggest you to read the Book of Etz Hayim where it says that, if some body attack Israel then, Israel has the right for self defend. Torah says if some body attack me then, I have a right for self defend, The so-called Jewish Voice for peace policy are pro War and destruction of the State of Israel. Abileach and JVFP are self hate Jews. How dare can you be against yourself? Now, I took one quote from Hamas and Koran. Let see what it says. The Hamas Charter is Violent and Racist. Here what Hamas says: "Israel will exist and will continue to exist until Islam will obliterate it, just as it obliterated others before it".
When Israel left Gaza,Hamas was elected the new governing party. The founding document of Hamas calls for the destruction of Israel and murder of the Jews. It is disturb me very much.

Koran says,Oh Muslimi! There is a Jew behind that three, come and kill him. As long as this remains the guiding document for Hamas and Hezbollah or the Palestinian people, the dream of peace remains impossible. Now, the so-called Jewish Voice for peace, is a brain washed against Israel. How, can they claim to be peaceful if some one from this group attacked me on the bus stop in San Francisco and, this person is still attacking me every time he see me in the city or on the counter demonstration where I stand with Israel? I would fight if I were Palestinian. I would fight for the human rights and against Hamas and Hezbollah because, I would realize that those two organizations would deny me basic human rights as individual. I would never fight against Israel. I would continue to support and love Israel and, I would make a lot of friends from Israel. Hamas and Hezbollah would ask me or member of my family and friends to go and to blow our selves up among Israelis. Why would I do this? Why would I hate my life? I love my life and the life of my family members and friends. And, I love Israel. I will continue to support Israel as long as I live. The Code Pink, is truthfully the Code for War and destruction of the State of Israel. The Jewish Voice for peace, is truthfully the Jewish Voice for War and destruction of the State of Israel

Posted by paul shkuratov on Feb. 23, 2013 @ 11:08 am

Ok Difi.......

Posted by Guest on Feb. 23, 2013 @ 11:30 am

Also from this author

  • Privatization of public housing

    Many residents feel they're moving from the frying pan of Housing Authority control into the fire of developer and nonprofit management

  • Homeless for the holidays

    Changing demographics in the Bayview complicate city efforts to open a shelter there

  • Betting on Graton

    Newest casino targeting Bay Area residents promises to share the wealth with workers and people of color