Your comments sound like a 1960′s era discussion between southern bigots and northern liberals. Yes yes you are probably wondeful people and wonderful on other issues. But here, you’ve got the hawks and doves on how to respond to someone else’s freedom struggle. There are exceptions, like Matt Borus who seems to see Palestinians as human beings. But many of your post reflect a view of Palestinians as a security problem only.

How can you ever hope to understand the legitimate issues of Palestinians from this selfish point of view? Yes, violence is bad, and there is a problem of security for Israelis. But I think you are more deeply reacting to the fact that freedom for Palestinians IS a threat to Jewish priviledge, just as black freedom is a threat to white priviledge. Don’t you understand that even this priviledge is based on injustice? Jew’s were damn good on civil rights for blacks, and gave their lives in the freedom summers. Many Jews are now stepping up to the plate for Palestinians. I hope you will be among the early ones to recognize this and discard all this ridiculous fear and racism that seems to be so present in your posts.

But who cares what I say anyway? I’m just some anonymous email troll who probably isn’t Jewish, and my name is certainly not:

Ward Cleaver

ok; i still can’t figure out what’s shocking or surprising about that, but no matter.

“No idea. Stop bringing in Israel generally.”

you’re right, what does Israel have to do with this? why would we even be discussing it?

I already told you — I am not like you. I don’t claim to know what is best for Israel.”

then why do you think birthright shouldnt allow settlers? and have you not been expressing a strong opinion on one state vs. two?

“tell me how Birthright Israel is a “failure” by its own mandate and goals (of sending young Jews to Israel), and not your own.”

it’s entirely successful according to that definition. I meant it’s a failure if it’s indeed so vulnerable that it fears what sierra does afterwards. perhaps failure wasn’t the right word. I do think they mishandled this one big time; it’s been a publicity bonanza for the hippie lesbos.

I strongly doubt we will be hearing about birthright barring settlers anytime soon.

“again, why on earth is it surprising that there would be one-staters in Birthright Unplugged?”

The relationship isn’t some casual easy thing. These aren’t one staters who happen to be IN Birthright Unplugged — Birthright Unplugged is owned and operated by One Staters.

“Do you think Mermelstein is a bigger threat to Israel than the continuing colonization of the territories?”

No idea. Stop bringing in Israel generally. I already told you — I am not like you. I don’t claim to know what is best for Israel. I live in New York. And this isn’t only about Israel. Again, for the 18th time (or so it feels) this is–for me–about demanding that Birthright Israel pay for something quite clearly outside of its mandate. You think partying with Mermelstein and her “comrades” is going to be good for Israel, you pay for it. Birthright Israel’s mandate is something different, and that is why the American Jewish community is a significant funder.

“what worldview is that?”

You tell me. Or alternatively, tell me how Birthright Israel is a “failure” by its own mandate and goals (of sending young Jews to Israel), and not your own.

and do they do anything about this? if a mother wrote to birthright and alerted them that her daughter intended to become a settler, do you think they’d prevent her from going on their trip?

but this doesnt throw you into hysterics, or are you gonna now post such people must be barred or it will harm Israel? Do you think Mermelstein is a bigger threat to Israel than the continuing colonization of the territories?

“And Birthright Unplugged is not open about what they support.”

again, why on earth is it surprising that there would be one-staters in Birthright Unplugged? It would amaze me that anyone would imagine otherwise.

“You use failure to mean a diffferent world virew than your own. ”

what worldview is that?

“Do you think Birthright Isrel should allow people on its program who openly declare their intention to become settlers, thus endangering the security of Israelis, and the two state solution, not to mention breaking international law?”

I think that would be bad policy. Birthright Israel shouldn’t fund people becoming settlers while on their trip.

You asked,

“if someone wants to lead a birthright group and they happen to put on their blog that they believe in one Jewish state from the river to the sea, or even the Nile to the Euphrates, should Birthright put that on their website?”

Do you really need me to explain this to you? Do you really not see a difference between a tour leader and a program creator and leader?

Okay. I will explain, but this is really a waste of time. Here you go. The difference between a mandate of a pogram and someone who happens to lead one of many programs is the mission of the larger program itself. If Steinhardt and Bronfman and the high ranking executives of Birthright Israel intended this to promote a Kahanist vision of Israel, or a Religious Zionist vision of Israel, or whatever vision, then yes, this should be stated openly. And it is. They support a State of Israel. They are open about this. And Birthright Unplugged is not open about what they support.

“If Birthright is so threatened by quilt-making lesbos showing young Jews the seamy underbelly of the occupation, then I’d say the program itself is a failure. ”

If it were a failure, our quilt-making friends would not have started their own program with Birthright’s name. You use failure to mean a diffferent world virew than your own. That is silly and dishonest. I would not call ISM a failure.

Calling BU a ‘one state solution trip’ is far from accurate.

perhaps; i read the following as advocacy:

“Note the language of an “apartheid wall.” This is simply ridiculous. The fence is clearly a precursor to disengagement. They know this. They are concerned that unilateral disengagement might solve Israel’s demographic problem, and alleviate pressure from the international community. So they call it something it is not in order to preempt its success. Apartheid is a hot and sexy concept, but it has nothing to do with this fence, which also serves as a defensive barrier to prospective infiltrators seeking a bus ride to eternity. ”

as to your points:

1. Birthright Israel is a private organization; I don’t care what criteria it uses. But I’m curious, do you think Birthright Isrel should allow people on its program who openly declare their intention to become settlers, thus endangering the security of Israelis, and the two state solution, not to mention breaking international law?

2. I fail to see how Birthright Unplugged is being “dishonest.” Why are you so shocked and scandalized that one of the founders advocates a one-state solution? if someone wants to lead a birthright group and they happen to put on their blog that they believe in one Jewish state from the river to the sea, or even the Nile to the Euphrates, should Birthright put that on their website?

If Birthright is so threatened by quilt-making lesbos showing young Jews the seamy underbelly of the occupation, then I’d say the program itself is a failure. By barring Sierra, they are saying their message is fragile, and giving mermelstein more attention than she could have ever hoped for.

What I am concerned about–again–is:

1) I don’t think Birthright Israel, a program for Diaspora Jews, should filp the air ticket bill for One State Solution trips. I think demands to the contrary are absurd and unfair, and have stated why.

2) I want it understood that the organization seeking to piggyback B.I. trips with their own is an unequivocal supporter of a One State Palestinian state. I think they should be honest about this. Birthright Israel is transparent about their position in support of the Jewish State. Birthright Unplugged should be honest about their support for its dismantling.

“some Israeli.” you don’t know who Gideon Levy is, DK? He has approx 20 years of experience reporting on the occupation for Ha’aretz. I daresay he knows a thing or two more than you or me about it. I don’t see how it’s not directly related to the topic — because what he’s talking about is international activists in the territories, the same people you’re railing against. can you just dismiss his opinion with a wipe of the hand? think he’s a one-love quilt-making lesbo, or a respected journalist that’s figured out a thing or two?

“Commies? Hey–I just noted their own language, and that it suggested this is–in their minds– a counter culture left wing movement, this One State thing, and insist that it is, in fact, something else besides a return to the Summer of Love.”

You’re so busy seeing red you’ve missed something that ought to be vitally important to you that mermelstein sees, and it’s that the two-state solution itself is threatened by the occupation. unilateralism, disengagement, convergence, realignment, whatever it’s gonna be called tomorrow, is not going to end the occupation. only a negotiated solution’s gonna do that, or a complete israeli withdrawal. And as long as the occupation continues, Israel is the de facto sovereign over the Palestinians — de facto, one state. so it’s you that’s advocating the one-state solution. so I hope you like One Love.