Lubin, Baltzer, and Libels

A Modern-Day Anti- Jewish Libel

 

Rabbi David Jay Kaufman's commentary helps inform readers as to the nature and context of some of the accusations being leveled against Israel. 

 

 

The following is Rabbi  Kaufman's commentary on one current attempt to demonize Jewish Israelis in the Israel Defense Forces and Israel, by extension, by painting a picture of Israelis as Nazis.   Rabbi Kaufman addresses  the current worldwide dissemination of a libelous accusation that an Israeli solder forced a Gazan mother to choose which of her children should be killed --  a projection of the "Sophie's Choice" Holocaust scenario upon Israel. 

 

Summary:

" The sickening nature of this story and of dozens of other equally false and demonizing lies that have been revealed as lies that have come from Gaza over the past weeks should put anyone who cares about the truth on red alert for more. ... It is inconceivable to me, short of reporting [Israeli Jewish soldiers]  drinking the blood of the children or using [blood] for making Matzah, [how anyone ] could have relayed a ...story ...portraying Jews in a more classically anti-Jewish light....  [This story] can only incite hatred and [was] likely created to do just that "  --David J. Kaufman 

 

This is an important commentary on a topic that should be of concern to all who abhore the sowing of hate and the reinforcement of millenia-old hateful stereotypes.  Unfortunately, the damage is likely irreparable.  There is a ready market of individuals to buy the story, however fallacious -- as there is a coterie of  'equivocationists' who will disavow the veracity of the story but will 'understand' how such stories can possibly be believed due to Israel's alleged evils.  In either case, such hateful or hypocritical reactions must be opposed.  Rabbi Kaufman's commentary is a contribution to that effort.

                                                     //Mark Finkelstein, JCRC Des Moines Jewish Federation.  jcrc@dmjfed.org

 -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

 

Shalom,

 

As I tend to monitor the hatred being spewed against Israel, I came across I nice ditty from Anna Baltzer quoting Barbara Lubin in what amounts to a Blood Libel, but really is more a Palestinian re-creation of a famous story from the NAZI period. In the version from Baltzer that I saw, she herself compared the story with one from the Nazi period. The story is one in which a mother is forced to choose which of her children should be killed.

 

While I find it sickening, I find it more sickening and disturbing that what is almost assuredly demonizing propaganda was sent around the world wherein it will become fact regardless of its veracity. I have seen this multiple times already in this recent conflict. The UN itself was guilty of this in recent weeks, only finally "correcting" its accusation that Israel had deliberately struck a school and killed those sheltered in it. What I am finding is that the "Peace Community" is sending out all accusations of horrific actions by Israel as if they were true. I'm sure that you will have seen Anna Baltzer's statements from one source or another.

 

I found Baltzer's apology for sending out the blood libel (as if apologizing for linking Jews to Nazis because her friend did it first should somehow be acceptable) at http://www.google-way.com/Palestine-Witness.html. Of course, Baltzer didn't really apologize at all, but instead said something along the lines of "I might have believed it too and haven't written it off as false yet." This, in my mind puts her so far across the line of demonizing Israel that I have no problem calling her a Jewish Jew-hater. Why? Because she is chomping at the bit to declare it true or at least reasonable. Even if it actually happened, it wouldn't be reasonable. It would be one or two very sick soldiers. Yet she acts as if somehow these two would legitimately represent Israel. That thought process alone is enough to cross the line for me.

 

Why not just call her just a critic of Israel? Because she uses her status as a child of Holocaust survivors to directly connect her Judaism to her criticisms of Israel and specifically to connect the NAZIs to the Israelis. Her contention that she is cautious in publicly making connections between the Israelis and NAZIs is laughable and frankly false. Her defense of circulating the modern blood libel was obscene itself.

 

Baltzer wrote:

 

"The truth is that everyday people of any background in any place are capable of unthinkable crimes. Germans were not born Nazis. Palestinians were not born suicide bombers. When you give 18-year-old boys big guns and tanks and send them into an area full of people they fear (and consequently hate), the result is predictable. It doesn't matter where you come from. The story is not anti-Semitic; it's just one story of many, all testimonies to the dangerous power-dynamic created by unmonitored occupation and ethnocentric nationalism.. And it's a call for us to change the circumstances that can lead to the repetition of history.

Comparing Israel's actions to anything done by the Nazis is something I almost never do, because it is rarely accurate or useful. However, I am tired of pretending that similarities do not exist. Obviously there is no comparison between systematically exterminating 6 million Jews and dispossessing or imprisoning 10 million Palestinians (and killing tens of thousands more). Still, the ghettoizing, the massacres, the humiliation tactics, the torture, the religious and ethnic profiling… they all feel so horribly familiar. I might add that the official definition of genocide extends also to the destruction of a cultural or national identity, something of which Israel is surely guilty. "

 

I continue:

 

Not having the time to deal with the multitude of accusations in the paragraph above or the misrepresentations, I simply put forth her statement just to point out that she specifically notes that "The story is not anti-Semtiic.." Are you kidding? The story is a classic Jew-hatred filled libel. It is Israelis, Jews, as Nazis. It is the worst possible demonization of Israelis and could easily push someone who already is filled with hatred against Jews to act upon that hatred. To circulate it and to defend it is beyond explanation. Lubin and Baltzer's minds must be so full of hatred for Israel that they do not care what impact the spreading of demonization of Israel could have on Jews around the world.

 

Meanwhile, her friend and her friend's organization, MECA whose unconscionable distribution of this libel also belies explanation, now has posted a disclaimer on their website at http://pulsemedia.org/2009/01/24/letter-from-gaza-barbara-lubin/

 

The posting by Lubin now includes the following disclaimer:

"Barbara Lubin and all of us at the Middle East Children’s Alliance believe that we should have confirmed the story about the Gaza woman who was told by an Israeli soldier to choose which five of her ten children should die, and then witnessed their murder. We are doing everything we can now to verify the story, but have been unable to do so. We ask that you do not publish or post this story on the Internet. If you have already done so, please post this statement, as well.

Barbara Lubin went to Gaza to deliver four tons of medicine and other aid to the people there. When she arrived in the immediate aftermath of the Israeli assault the scene she encountered was chaotic and the people traumatized. She heard and retold many horrifying accounts, and saw for herself the devastation to homes, schools, businesses, land and lives.

In these catastrophic circumstances, it’s not difficult to see how Barbara would find this story credible. Unfortunately, we sent it out before taking the time to verify it. "

[I continue...]

 

I must say that I appreciate MECA's follow up. Perhaps, they figured that distributing material full of libelous Jew-hatred might belie their appearance as an organization that cares about all human beings and not just all human beings who are not Israelis. My bet is that someone called them on it.

 

My belief is that Barbara Lubin, like Anna Baltzer, believes that Israelis are hate filled murderers, or at least many are, and therefore was perfectly willing to believe this story. Already seeing Israelis as Nazis who speak Hebrew, it does not take much to make them Nazi murderers who speak Hebrew. I'm sorry, but the sickening nature of this story and of dozens of other equally false and demonizing lies that have been revealed as lies that have come from Gaza over the past weeks should put anyone who cares about the truth on red alert for more.

 

The only path to peace being paved by the work of Lubin and Baltzer in distributing this libel and other propaganda created by Hamas is one that leads through crematoria designed for those who survived the Holocaust. It is inconceivable to me how, short of reporting [Israeli Jews] drinking the blood of the children or using their blood for making Matzah, Lubin could have relayed a more damning story or one portraying Jews in a more classically anti-Jewish light. It frightens me that she did. It frightens me more that Anna Baltzer did. She should know better.

 

I certainly hope that our local peace communities are smart enough to treat such accusations with an understanding that stories such as this can only incite hatred and were likely created to do just that.

 

 

David Jay Kaufman
Rabbi,  Temple B'nai Jeshurun
Des Moines, IA
515-274-4679

Overview: Understanding Israel on the eve of its election

An interpretation of Israel's domestic situation on the eve of the Israeli elections to be held February 10, 2009 by a respected analyst.

Israel’s Election in International Perspective

by Barry Rubin, GLORIA, Feb. 8, 2009

Prof. Barry Rubin, GLORIA

Many people don’t understand what’s happening now in Israeli politics, so here’s a brief, and non-partisan, appreciation. Compared to the past, there’s far less difference between the three main parties. This is largely due to the objective situation, which is rather inflexible.

It is easy to characterize some as rabid right-wingers who throw away chances for peace and others as rabid left-wingers who are ready to make too many concessions. Neither argument is correct except for the fringes, which are not going to shape Israeli policy. I am tempted to add that abroad, the left thinks we’re evil, while the right thinks we’re stupid. All of this has little to do with reality.

The dominant theme in international media coverage is to say Israelis are moving toward the right. Yet this is both misleading and misinterpreted. On the first aspect, the real Israeli move has been toward the center, which is represented not only by Kadima and Likud but also by Labor. The great majority of Israelis are about to vote for parties close to centrist positions than at any time in history.

The left-wing mantra is peace, though how we can reach peace with Iran, Syria, Hamas, and Hizballah is rather hard to see. With the PA the situation is a more complex but, briefly, it doesn’t control Gaza, is still full of radical elements, and has weak leadership.

The PA is nowhere near being able to make peace on a realistic basis. Everyone in the PA and in Israel’s leadership knows this; few in the Western media and academia seems close to comprehending it. A lot of governments understand the situation privately but talk quite different in public.

The right-wing mantra is victory, though how Israel is going to replace the Iranian and Syrian governments, or destroy Hamas and Hizballah is equally hard to see. Israel has minimal to no international support for these goals and lacks great alternatives to what exists at present.

What have Israelis learned over the last decade that shapes their thinking?

We discovered that Palestinians and Syrians are unwilling and unable to make peace.

We saw that Fatah is still full of extremism and its leadership is too weak and too hardline itself to make a comprehensive peace agreement.

We viewed the rise of Hamas as a group dedicated to permanent war with Israel and its seizure of one-half of the Palestinian-ruled territories, using land from which Israel withdrew as a base for attacks.

We experienced the continuing hatred of the Arab world and Muslim world toward Israel, largely undiminished by Israeli concessions.

We observed Iran’s rise as a power, potentially nuclear armed, whose regime explicitly seeks Israel’s extinction.

We noted the world didn’t reward Israel for making concessions and taking risks. Indeed, the more Israel gave, the higher the degree of slander and hostility rose in many sectors.

As a result of this, there has arisen in Israel a national consensus around the following points:

–Israel wants peace and will make real concessions for true lasting, stable peace and a two-state solution

–Few think the Palestinian leadership—PA, Fatah—is willing or able to make such an agreement for decades. The same applies to Syria.

–As a result, any real changes on Jerusalem, the Golan Heights or West Bank settlements are far off.

–No deal can be made with Hamas. But Hamas isn’t going to disappear either. The same applies to Hizballah.

–The key point is to defend Israel and its citizens so they pursue their normal lives.

–Iran is a real danger and when it appears about to get nuclear weapons, a big decision will have to be made on attacking these facilities.

As a result of this national consensus—accepted by Labor, Likud, and Kadima, along with many others—the next government can be a national unity government. Whoever becomes prime minister would do well to bring in one or both of the other two main parties. What is Israel’s consensus policy for the next government?

–To stress that we want peace, are ready for a Palestinian state, aren’t responsible for the conflict and violence continuing.

–To maintain deterrence and defend ourselves.

–To preserve the best possible relations with the United States, Europe, and other countries as long as it does not involve risks to Israeli national interests and citizens.

–Security cooperation with the PA to prevent terrorist attacks on Israel in exchange for helping them economically and against Hamas to ensure that it doesn’t take over the West Bank. Without illusions regarding Fatah and the PA, this effort seems to be working.

–To decide when to strike back at Hamas—and potentially Hizballah—based on any attacks on us. Precise response depends on timing, opportunity, and their behavior.

–To work for the isolation of Iran, Hizballah and Hamas.

Where are the main differences among the leading parties? They are more atmospherics than real: offering small concessions; making small demands. If much of the election revolves around personalities that is because strategy and policy are not hugely different among them. Bibi isn’t going to embark on a settlement-building campaign; Tzipi isn’t going to give away east Jerusalem.

And that’s a good thing for whatever faults they have, this trio is basically making appropriate responses to the situation.

Barry Rubin is director of the Global Research in International Affairs (GLORIA) Center and editor of the Middle East Review of International Affairs (MERIA) Journal. His latest books are The Israel-Arab Reader (seventh edition), with Walter Laqueur (Viking-Penguin); the paperback edition of The Truth About Syria (Palgrave-Macmillan); A Chronological History of Terrorism, with Judy Colp Rubin, (Sharpe); and The Long War for Freedom: The Arab Struggle for Democracy in the Middle East (Wiley). To subscribe to Gloria Center publications for free, write profbarryrubin@yahoo.com.