Tuesday, November 19, 2019
Elder of Ziyon
Guest post by American Zionism
We have lots of ideas, but we need more resources to be even more effective. Please donate today to help get the message out and to help defend Israel.
On November 14, Hen Mazzig gave a speech at Vassar College.
He was interrupted by members of the local chapter of Students for Justice in
Palestine with chants of "from the river to the sea, Palestine will be
free". They were intimidating and disrespectful to the people who went to hear
him speak.
I know that Hen is open to dialogue with anyone and welcomes
all questions, no matter how hard they may be. But the group was not there to
hear him or engage with him, they were there to silence and humiliate him. They
went to deny him his inalienable right to express his views regardless of what
they may be. It also happens to be that his message was one of inclusiveness
and reconciliation, and the protesters' message was one of bigotry and
division. In following Hen for a number of years on Twitter and having seen him
speak in person, I can tell you that he advocates for the national aspirations
for the Palestinians. He has never once said that he denies them their rights.
On the other hand, the chant "from the river to the sea" is a call to
remove all the Jews from the Holy Land, dismantle the State of Israel, and
replace it with a Palestinian state that will span from the Jordan river to the
Mediterranean Sea. Make no mistake, this is a casus belli to push the
Jews into the sea. They are no advocates of peace. They aren't even advocates
of justice. And, they are certainly no advocates of a two-state solution. This
is nationalism at its most extreme.
While Hen was being interrupted, he videotaped the
disturbance and posted it on Twitter. Hen can be seen sitting silently waiting
for it to end, and Jewish students in the audience can be seen sitting
uncomfortably not knowing what to do, all the while SJP continued their
harassment and their racist chant. As you can imagine, many Jews who were
watching this unfold on Twitter were shaken and upset, myself included. Here
Jews are once again are being denied the right to speak, and this denial is
supported by many people who should know better. Where was the security? Where
was the administration? This is not a free expression of speech. This is
denying others their free expression of speech. Everyone, whether you agree
with Hen or not and whether you like Hen or not, should have supported his
right to share his story with those that had invited him to speak and who
attended the event. But that is not what happened. In fact, the opposite
happened. Having already faced abuse at the event, people chose this
opportunity to attack him even further. That is where the Tweet by Abe
Silberstein enters, which you can read below.
Mr. Silberstein does not attack Hen's arguments, but rather
he attacks Hen himself, going so far as calling him a "low quality of
speaker" and a "provocateur", all to justify SJP's harassment
and attempt to silence him. If this isn't mean spirited and bullying - name
calling and insulting to silence someone - then I don't know what is.
Mr. Silberstein is a journalist, who has written for many well-known
publications. A journalist's defense of the first amendment is like a religious
conviction. Otherwise, it is not journalism - it's propaganda. Journalists have
been killed in defense of the free speech. Justifying the silencing of a
speaker because someone perceives them as being lower quality is not only a
violation of the First Amendment, but a sure slide towards fascism. At no point
in his tweet did Silberstein refute anything that Hen talked about. He did not
mention the content of his speeches. He stated that he is of "low
quality", a "provocateur", and even asserted that Hen was
pleased with getting interrupted, that it is part of some hidden agenda. He
wrote, "Hen plays dirty". I challenge anyone to show me one thing in
his tweet that was a "thoughtful and critical assessment of Hen at
@Vassar." You can't, because this was a classic argumentum ad hominem,
an attack on the person, rather than the stance. It is mean spirited, and it is
bullying.
When I wrote my
response to Silberstein, I did the opposite of what he did. Not once did I
attack him personally, but rather his argument.
Whereas Silberstein stated Hen was of low quality, worthy of
censure and ridicule, I responded to Silberstein's comments only. His comment
was disgusting. His assessment was wrong and mean spirited. What he wrote was
bullying. I did not call him disgusting, or mean spirited. I wrote it of his
comment only. I stand by what I wrote and I challenge anyone to show me where I
am wrong.
Besides the ad hominem attack on Hen, there is another
point that is very troubling. Abe Silberstein notes in his bio that he is a
writer for the Israel Policy Forum. If you look on their website, you will find
his bio there listing him as a contributor.
The Statement of Principles of the Israel Policy Forum on their website
reads:
They present themselves as "staunch supporters of the
security and well-being of the State of Israel, the democratic nation-state of
the Jewish people", with "the goal of a two-state solution to the
Israeli-Palestinian conflict, consistent with Israel's security needs."
How can they support a safe Israel and push a two-state solution when they have
someone writing for them who justifies chants of "from the river to the
sea" which signals the destruction of Israel, and who bullies a person
online that has consistently advocated for the two-state solution? I posted
that question to them in my reply.
After my reply to Silberstein, he blocked me and I forgot
about it, until a fellow Twitter user informed me that a director for the New
Israel Fund (NIF) was slandering me.
Harry Reis is listed as the Director for Policy and Strategy
on the NIF website. The NIF is a left wing organization, who's stated objective
is:
"We work to shape the
discourse and mobilize support among American Jewish leaders and U.S.
policymakers for the realization of a viable two-state solution. We
do this by educating political and communal leaders on pragmatic policy ideas –
developed by credible security experts. "
In his libelous
tweet, he labels me as "pro-occupation right". This is a lie. He does
not name me in the tweet but attaches an image of my tweet to Silberstein as
reference. Anyone who knows me knows that I am not on the right, nor do I
identify myself as right. I have conceptually and consistently maintained a
position not dissimilar to the Israel Policy Forum of Israelis and Palestinians
living side by side in peace as long as the security of Israel is maintained.
To label me as a "pro-occupation", is an attack on my Twitter persona
and what I try to accomplish.
He then says I "falsely + disingenuously" called
Silberstein a bully. As, I have shown above, it was neither false nor
disingenuous. He was bullying Hen, and my defense of him was genuine.
Reis then claimed that Silberstein's tweet about Hen was
"a thoughtful and critical assessment". Insulting someone as
"low quality", a "provocateur" and claiming that he secretly
craves the protest to promote himself is not exactly a thoughtful assessment. It
is garbage. Whether Silberstein is an "honest person of good
character" I do not know and I never said otherwise. Before reading that
tweet, I had never heard of him. But then Reis goes on to issue his own attack
on Hen, claiming somehow what I wrote is proof that he "plays dirty".
Great, now I’m part of a conspiracy - not only is Hen responsible for what
other people write, but probably directs them to write it, according to Reis.
Needless to say, there is nothing thoughtful or even truthful about his
accusations.
His entire tweet was an attack on my character. It was
filled with lies. It was damaging to my reputation. That he used a screenshot
of my tweet but didn't have the decency to tag me in it so that I may defend
myself speaks volumes of his character, not mine. Attached to his tweet was a
string of replies attacking me with even more lies. I was even harassed
directly because of his libelous tweet, called a "joke", a
"troll", a "coward", and "garbage".
Another user, Rabbi Andy Kahn, parroted Reis words of
"pro-occupation right", plus said I was a "shande
(sic)" and a "bad faith actor".
Last I checked,
before he blocked me, Reis' tweet has nearly 100 likes and several dozen
comments, all bad mouthing me, an individual who dedicates his time to
defending the very country Reis claims to care about. I may be anonymous right
now, but that does not mean I plan on remaining anonymous forever. I chose to
be anonymous at the moment for many reasons, including having received death
threats. I have spent five years building a following on Twitter the right way.
I do not spread hate. I do not discriminate. I spend hours doing historic
research. The information I tweet is carefully checked and my reputation is
important to me. The fact that he defamed me based on false information, and
that has now spread through Twitter, is an attack on me personally, even if I
am currently anonymous, and of my ability to one day accomplish the things I
hope to.
The New Israel Fund is a large organization with dozens if
not hundreds of employees, revenue and expenses in the millions, and very
generous funding by some powerful people. It is Goliath. It is the proverbial
1%. I am sure Reis is well paid for his work at NIF. I on the other hand have a
regular job completely unrelated to my advocacy. I defend Israel and do
research on my own time. It is a labor of love. I have never made one penny
doing it. In fact, in the times I have been published writing about Israel, I did
not accept compensation and instead directed the editor to make a charitable
contribution in my name. I am the David. I am the 99%. Here you have a powerful
organization with millions of dollars at their disposal defaming with a
libelous tweet the little guy, an individual whose Israel advocacy is balanced,
thoughtful, and charitable. This is David versus Goliath. Many of the people
that replied to Reis also blocked me, even as they continued to speak ill of
me. It is not acceptable. I ask that the New Israel Fund and Mr. Reis issue an
apology and retraction.
My tweet was in defense of Hen Mazzig. It was genuine. The tweets by Silberstein and Reis were mean spirited and filled with lies, which
attacked people and not ideas. They were meant to silence us to advance only
their point of view, one that is rejected by the vast majority of mainstream
Jews. They were meant to humiliate. They were wrong, and yes, they were
bullying.
UPDATE: Abe Silberstein sent me an apology for his tweet that he asked me to add to this article:
UPDATE: Abe Silberstein sent me an apology for his tweet that he asked me to add to this article:
This past weekend, I published a tweet saying that pro-Israel groups should consider the quality of invited speakers amidst various campus controversies. I linked to a statement from Vassar College about a recent speech by Hen Mazzig that was interrupted by members of Students for Justice in Palestine with chants of "from the river to the sea, Palestine will be free." I also suggested Hen may have welcomed such a reaction.
I deeply regret sending this tweet, which I have since deleted. Hen was grossly mistreated at Vassar and most certainly did not take pleasure in what happened. I let my strong personal disagreements with Hen get in the way of my better judgment, and I apologize to him for that.
I am sorry that Hen endured anti-Semitism during his talk and did not mean to justify it, though I understand why some may have seen it that way. I wish him nothing but the best for the future.
