Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP Posting-Version: version B 2.10.2 9/18/84; site uwvax.UUCP Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!burl!ulysses!gamma!epsilon!zeta!sabre!petrus!bellcore!decvax!genrad!panda!talcott!harvard!seismo!uwvax!David ParterFrom: david@wisc-rsch.arpa (David Parter) Newsgroups: net.religion.jewish Subject: Re: Jews and Israel Message-ID: <270@uwvax.UUCP> Date: Thu, 22-Aug-85 01:15:16 EDT Article-I.D.: uwvax.270 Posted: Thu Aug 22 01:15:16 1985 Date-Received: Sat, 24-Aug-85 19:16:36 EDT References: <4973@allegra.UUCP> <332@sol1.UUCP> Sender: david@uwvax.UUCP Distribution: net Organization: UWisc Systems Lab Lines: 61 > In article <332@sol1.UUCP> s252@sol1.UUCP (Al Berg) writes: > >As Jews, what is our responsibility to the State of Israel? Jay Hyman writes: > In short, my point is that there are ways of communicating directly, > in the role of brethren, with the leaders who represent us in > Jerusalem. There is, of course, another avenue for expressing > political opinions, and that is the American press. This, I feel, is > not the appropriate forum for expressing opposition. Criticizing > Israel in front of a third party (the American public) does not help > change Israeli policies; it only serves to create animosity and to add > fuel to the fires of Anti-Semitism and Anti-Zionism (the fine line > between them, if it exists, is seldom observed) which are so easily > ignited throughout the world. Unfortunately, during Operation Peace > for Galilee, many American Jewish leaders did just this: they > criticized Israel and threatened withdrawal of support if Israel > didn't change their policies - in the American papers. The New York > Times delighted in printing it; Israel was enraged to hear these > threats second hand. i disagree: it depends entirely upon the issue at hand. I was opposed to the invasion of Lebabnon, ('Operation Peace for Galilee'), and felt the need to let my oposition be heard -- not just by Israeli politicians, but also by the American Jewish community at large and American Jewish leaders, who did not speak about any reservations at all about the war until (at the earliest) the end of the summer of '82. Keeping our disagreements 'behind closed doors' does not always make it better. The Jewish people, (and the Zionist movement -- there is a difference) are not a monolitic entity with one opinion and point of view. Expressing ourselves on issues as important as (what I and many others considered) an un-neccessary war is positive and healthy for the Jewish People. Wars, especially such as the war in Lebanon, are not. > If you don't like the policies of a group to which you belong, you > have two valid options: a) Quit the group (and condemn it if you wish) > b) Try to change it from inside. > To continue your membership in the group while badmouthing it to > others is a hypocritical and futile attempt to assuage your feelings > of guilt. When the group is not an exclusive, secret organization, but one that *is* part of the world, and the issues are part of public life, to debate the issues in public is not hypocritical. > Thus, my answer to the question, given that one still feels a > connection to Israel, is: either get involved and try to change what > you don't like, or keep your mouth shut. i choose the first: i am involved. Sometimes this leads me to speak out in public. I try to be responsible about it at all times. david -- david parter UWisc Systems Lab uucp: ...!{allegra,harvard,ihnp4,seismo, topaz}!uwvax!david arpa now: david@wisc-rsch.arpa arpa soon: david@wisc-rsch.WISCONSIN.EDU or something like that