The Banning of Rabbi Lerner

by David Corn



War looms. Troops are moving into place. Administration officials refuse to discuss alternatives. And everyday George W. Bush has some new rhetorical device to turn up the heat. The game is over. The game is really over. I mean it: the game is really, really over. Americans opposed to (or skeptical about) this war are desperately trying to mount preemptive protests, as conquest--bombing, invasion and occupation--nears. Antiwar actions have been organized for the weekend of February 15 and 16, to coincide with protests around the world. In the United States, the main events will be demonstrations held in New York and San Francisco. This could be the last chance the antiwar warriors have before the cruise missiles fly. Yet the peaceniks pulling together the San Francisco march and rally may have tainted their efforts by allowing the banning of Rabbi Michael Lerner as a speaker.

Also See:

Let Anti-War Rabbi Michael Lerner Speak

Lerner is the progressive Jew. He edits Tikkun, a magazine mostly written by lefty Jews. (Its name is Hebrew for "to mend, repair and transform the world.") He can be counted on to sign on to most liberal causes. He is a signatory to the Not In Our Name antiwar pledge. His Tikkun Community is a member of the United for Peace & Justice coalition that opposes a U.S. war against Iraq. (Other members include the American Friends Service Committee, Global Exchange, Greenpeace, TransAfrica, Working Assets.) He has been a leading Jewish voice against the hawks of Israel and a supporter of Palestinian rights, while calling himself a Zionist.

So it was natural that his name was floated as a speaker for the protest. Not In Our Name and United for Peace & Justice were two of the four coalitions behind the event. (According to Lerner, he did not ask to address the San Francisco rally. "You can't say much in three minutes," he notes.) But International ANSWER, another of the organizers, said no.

Lerner's crime: he had dared to criticize ANSWER, an outfit run by members of the Workers World Party, for using antiwar demonstrations to put forward what he considers to be anti-Israel propaganda. That ANSWER objected to Lerner is not surprising. The WWPers in control of ANSWER are socialists who call for the revolutionary overthrow of capitalism, who support Slobodan Milosevic and Kim Jong Il, who oppose UN inspections in Iraq (claiming they are part of the planning for an invasion aimed at gaining control of Iraq's oil fields), and who urge smashing Zionism. Last month, referring to an upcoming ANSWER demonstration, Lerner wrote, "In my view, the organizers of this demonstration have allowed far too many speakers who believe that this war is being done because Israel wants the war, far too few who share my view that this war is not in the best interests of either Israel or of the United States." Yet Lerner didn't let his differences with ANSWER trump his opposition to the war; he encouraged people to attend the rally. After that protest, he told The New York Times, "There are good reasons to oppose the war and Saddam. Still, it feels that we are being manipulated when subjected to mindless speeches and slogans whose knee-jerk anti-imperialism rarely articulates the deep reasons we should oppose corporate globalization."

ANSWER's nyet doesn't irk Lerner as much as the fact that Not In Our Name and United for Peace & Justice acquiesced. Before Lerner had been suggested as a speaker, the coalitions engineering the San Francisco event had agreed that any individual who had publicly disparaged one of the organizing groups could be vetoed as a speaker by that group. ANSWER used this right to banish Lerner. (The rabbi maintains he had no intention of using his podium time to slam ANSWER: "Why waste my three minutes on ANSWER?") Other organizers of the San Francisco event argued against ANSWER's thumbs-down but ended up abiding by the agreement. (ANSWER has not been involved in the organizing of the coming New York City protest.)

ANSWER could cite Lerner's criticism of ANSWER as a reason for blocking him. But its objection to Lerner also jibes with the group's political agenda. On January 28, Tony Murphy, the media coordinator for ANSWER, appeared on a radio show in New York and said, "I know that the ANSWER coalition would not have a pro-Israel speaker on its platform." (Lerner is pro-Israel in that he supports the existence of the Jewish state.) ANSWER's anti-Israel stance has also been reflected in its relationship with at least one troubling anti-Zionist. At its January march in Washington, ANSWER handed a microphone to Abdul Malim Musa, a Muslim cleric. On October 31, 2001, Musa had appeared at a news conference at the National Press Club with other Muslim activists and members of the New Black Panther Party, where speakers asserted that Israel had launched the 9/11 attacks and that thousands of Jews had been warned that day not to go to work at the World Trade Center. At that press conference, Musa blasted the "Zionists in Hollywood, the Zionists in New York, and the Zionists in D.C." who "all collaborate" to put down blacks and Muslims. ANSWER has room in its antiwar coalition for Musa, but not Lerner.

On Monday, Lerner disseminated an email reporting he had been banned. And Beyt Tikkun synagogue, where Lerner serves as a rabbi, released a statement saying, "we do not believe that had ANSWER been criticized by a major feminist or gay leader and then vetoed that leader to speak at a demonstration that the other coalition partners would go along with that. So why should criticism of anti-Semitism and Israel-bashing be treated differently?....So why should our voice of critique of ANSWER's anti-Israel policy serve as justification for excluding our rabbi from speaking?"

ANSWER did not return my call seeking comment. Which isn't a shock. I've written critically about their role in the antiwar movement, and their folks, in return, have assailed me. I also tried reaching Andrea Buffa, the San Francisco-based co-chair of United for Peace & Justice, and didn't hear back. Ditto for the San Francisco office of Not In Our Name. On Monday evening, organizers of the rally were trying to "resolve" the matter, according to one source. But Lerner was not offered a speaker's slot. Instead, he says, he has been asked by the organizers to talk about all this after the event. In the meantime, The Wall Street Journal and National Public Radio have interviewed Lerner about ANSWER's rejection of him and the other organizers' acceptance of that. And over 150 progressive writers and activists have signed a letter decrying the Lerner ban. (Click here to read the petition.)

"This is about the suppressing of dissent among the dissenters," Lerner asserts. "My progressive Jewish allies said, 'Don't raise this issue, it's more important to stick to the struggle against the war.' But in my view, we should be able to critique the war and this section of the antiwar movement, just as did the women who fought against sexism in the antiwar movement in the 1960s. I don't accept an either/or."

Some peace activists in San Francisco were dismayed that Lerner took the dispute public. "What Michael did doesn't help," one says. But Lerner was more of a mensch than the people of ANSWER. Even after being blackballed, he has been advising people to attend the protest. "I don't want to boycott the demonstration," he says. "It's extremely important for progressive Jews to be standing up and critiquing the war, particularly when so many in the Jewish world are supporting it. We'll be part of the event, no matter what they do to me."

Perhaps he should have stayed silent for the good of the cause. Who needs such tsuris right before an important protest? But Lerner was not the source of the problem; ANSWER was. This distracting episode shows what can happen when sincere do-gooders enter into deals with the ANSWER gang. If the reasonable and responsible foes of war are fortunate enough to have further opportunity to rally opposition to the conflict before it occurs, they ought to reconsider their alliance with the censors of ANSWER.

Copyright © 2003 The Nation

I may be in the minority here, but I find ANSWER's actions indefensible. I appreciate all their organizing, but refuse to buy into this type of heavy-handedness--which plays directly to critics of the anti-war movement who say we're getting our strings pulled by sectarian puppet-masters. I think the Bush presidency is a disaster, but I am equally glad that ANSWER isn't running the country. This whole thing makes me sad.

I may be in the minority here, but I find ANSWER's actions indefensible. I appreciate all their organizing, but refuse to buy into this type of heavy-handedness--which plays directly to critics of the anti-war movement who say we're getting our strings pulled by sectarian puppet-masters. I think the Bush presidency is a disaster, but I am equally glad that ANSWER isn't running the country. This whole thing makes me sad.

Wow, it looks like David is sure earning

his paycheck from his budies in the CIA.

I really appreciated how Rabbi Lerner told KPFK radio yesterday that people should go to protests and marches sponsored by answer because the cause is greater then the fit they have against him.

This is a big deal, now is not the time to be creating devisions like this, and ANSWER should not be doing this. Lerner is a great activist, he speaks to a lot of people. Luckily, he and most of the rest of us are mature enough to critique while also support the greater cause. Stop the war. Protest the war, remain suspect to all leaders.

This is pretty typical of how ANSWER operates. They are sectarians who throw temper tantrums when other activists don't follow orders. What really sucks is to hear from activists who defend ANSWER, which just insults the groups that have been fucked over by them. Just today I talked to a veteran activist who explained to me how her group was being jacked around by an ANSWER supporter.

Oh yeah, please don't buy into ANSWER crying about being the victims of red-baiting. They engage in red-baiting and other shitty stuff against other activists off stage.

ANSWER is not the answer.

i mean come on seriously International Answer gets a lot of flack for the whole front group thing which i don't think is really a good basis to condemm the group but the situation around Rabbi Lerner is ridiculous. How can you have the gaul to try and censor the most prominent Jewish activist because he criticized your boring group. I'm glad people got around to make up a statement to petition against this b.s. I hope Nion and United for Peace put out a statement in support of Lerner.

Answer is really running out of bridges to burn

The ANSWER censorship is goofy, but if you read that article, Lerner never asked to speak.

Somehow it's fucked up, and not an issue at the same time.

Banning Michael Lerner is an outstanding decision based on his anti-Communism and his support of the Israeli military to the extent that his son is NOT a refusenik but a paratrooper in the Israeli military! This swine just got done telling us on KPFA in Berkeley, CA that he objects to people wearing the kaffiyeh, the Arab scarves, at our peace demonstrations! The fact that CIA mouthpiece, David Corn, praises Michael Lerner is additional proof that ANSWER is doing something right. For more information on the despicable Michael Lerner, see:

http://www.sf.indymedia.org/news/2003/02/1572342.php

Again, Protest now and protest often along-side answer. But, to quote Michael Lerner, he seeks a

> "progressive middle path" that is both pro-Israel

> > and pro-Palestine, and argues that the best

> > interests of each can only be achieved if the other

> > side also achieves its best interests.

What are the interests of Palestinians. A homeland.

What are the interests of Israel. A homeland.

Where are both people right now? In the historic land of Israel/Palestine, or Palestine/Israel. OK, so, we have jews in isreal right now. What happens if isreal stops being a country? Where do the 6 million jewish people go who are on the ground right there?

I am not a zionist. I lived in Israel, hated it and left. But, what happens if suddenly the Israeli army disapeared?

What would happen to all those people living there?

LET ANTI-WAR RABBI MICHAEL LERNER SPEAK



Rabbi Michael Lerner has been banned from speaking at the antiwar rally in San Francisco this Sunday, February 16. One of the rally organizers, Act Now to Stop War and End Racism (ANSWER), has stated that it will not allow a "pro-Israel" speaker to take the stage -- despite the fact that Rabbi Lerner has been an outspoken critic of Israeli policy in the occupied territories, has endorsed ANSWER's antiwar rallies in the past, has signed the Not in Our Name petition against the war, and is widely known to be among the most progressive of American rabbis. Other coalitions organizing the rally, including Not in Our Name and United for Peace and Justice, have acceded to ANSWER's opposition to Lerner, on the grounds that they had previously accepted as a condition for participation in the demonstration the agreement that if one of the groups vetoed a speaker that all would have to agree.

We, the undersigned, protest ANSWER's refusal to let Rabbi Lerner speak at this Sunday's rally. At a time when the antiwar movement needs as broad a platform and as broad an appeal as possible, ANSWER has chosen instead to put the interests of sectarianism ahead of the interests of all those who oppose this foolish and unnecessary war. We believe this is a serious mistake, and that it exemplifies ANSWER's unfitness to lead mass mobilizations against war in Iraq.

Partial List of Signers:



Greg Goldin, writer

Robert W. McChesney, writer

Jack Newfield, writer

Howard Zinn

Doug Ireland, writer

Ariel Dorfman, writer

Marc Cooper, writer

Michael Berube, Penn State

Candace Falk

Barbara Ehrenreich

Janine Jaquet, Nation Institute

John Powers, writer

Katha Pollitt, writer

George Regas, Rector Emeritus of All Saints Church, Pasadena CA

Suzi Weissman, professor

EricAlterman, writer

Kateri Butler, writer

Todd Gitlin, writer

Herbert J Gans, Columbia University

Suzy Marks

Wally Marks

Jo Ellen Green Kaiser, Tikkun

Michael Pugliese

Judy Bertelsen

Richard Falk

Paul Buhle

John Nichols, journalist

Peter Gray

Tom Christie, writer

Eyal Press, writer

Jon Wiener, historian UCI

Salam Al-Marayati

Michael Kazin, Georgetown University

Kim Chernin

Linda Gordon

Rabbi Leonard Beerman

Maxine Phillips

Jeffrey Ballinger

Francis X. Tobin

Lily Rivlin

Nelson Lichtenstein

A. Tom Grunfeld

Robert Vitalis

Ruth Indeck

Laura Tillem

Mark Levine, UCI

Shulamith Koenig

Fred Myers, NYU

Sylvain Nagler

Dr. Jeffrey Levine

Frances Fox Piven

Christopher Lowe

Moss Roberts, NYU

Erik Olin Wright

Lee Smith, writer

Michael Balter, writer

Carl Bromley, Nation Books

Harold Meyerson, writer

Stew Albert

Judy Albert

Al Wasserman

Anne Wasserman

Horace Small, Union of Minority Neighborhoods

Celeste Fremon, writer

Matthew Rothschild, Editor, The Progressive

Stanley Aronowitz

Isaac Balbus

David Bensman

Ken Brociner

Shirley Bryant

Chaz Bufe

Leo Casey

Bogdan Denitch

Tom Edminster

Stuart Elliott

Irene Theodore Heinstein

Maurice Isserman

Peter Kosenko

Justin Paulson

Jason Schulman

Timothy Sears

Clifford L. Staples

Luke Weiger

Arthur Wilke

Ian Williams

Ellen Willis

Adam Shatz, writer

Emily Jane Goodman

Sonia Jaffe Robbins

Phyllis Chesler

Richard Healey

Dorothy Healey

Roy Ulrich, attorney

Naomi Glauberman, writer

Judith Long, The Nation

Maurice Zeitlin, author and professor

Bruce Shapiro, writer

Tad Daley, UCLA

Andrew Gumbel, journalist

Dr. Aryeh Cohen, University of Judaism, Los Angeles

Nalini Lasiewicz, Lasiewicz Foundation

Barbara Osborn, Liberty Hill Foundation

Fr. Chris Ponnet, Co-Chair Pax Christi USA, Los Angeles Chapter

Anita Frankel, former Public Affairs Dir. Pacifica Radio

Roane Carey, The Nation

Ellen Bollinger, The Nation

Reverend Ed Bacon, Rector, All Saints Church, Pasadena CA

Prof. Steve Ross, USC

Dr. Lawrence Littwin, CSUN

Kenneth Pomeranz

Ella Taylor, writer

Daniel Sokatch, Executive Director, Progressive Jewish Alliance

Francisco Letelier

Devra Weber

Jules Tygiel, SFSU

Ellen Carol DuBois, UCLA

Mike Davis, UCI

Michael Hudson

Marla Stone, Occidental College

Terrence McNally

Vicki Ruiz

Peter Dreier, Occidental College

Bobbi Murray, Journalist

Ginger Varney

Kevin B. Anderson, Purdue University

Jody Zonenchin

Robert H. Silk, Attorney

Susan T. Silk. PhD, Biochemist

Frank Smyth, journalist

Joe Domanick, writer

Laurie Salen

Dave Anderson

Sam Bottone

David Nasaw, CUNY Grad Center

Moshe Machover

Robin Arie-Donch

Amie Potsic

Ana Villa-Lobos

Constance Bernstein

Gretchen Mackler-Lipow

Arthur Lipow

Maggie Helwig, writer

Rabbi Shaya Isenberg, University of Florida

Richard H. Schwartz, College of Staten Island

Marcia Diaz

Howard A. Rodman

Rabbi Rachel Cowan, Nathan Cummings Foundation

Scott Tucker

Daniel Pope, University of Oregon

Jordan Elgrably, Open Tent Middle East Coalition

Don Bustany, “Middle East in Focus” KPFK

Marge Piercy

Habiba Alcindor

Richard Applebaum

Chester Hartman, Exec. Dir., Poverty & Race Research Action Council.

Sean Strub, POZ Magazine

Larry Gross, University of Pennsylvania

David E. James

Rita Adessa

Susan Windle, poet

Flavia Potena

Sule Ozler

Mike Feinstein, Santa Monica City Council

Paul Isaacs

Kelly Candaele

Karen Schanche

Arlene Stein, Rutgers University

Sandy Polishuk

Vicky Loel

Juan Romano

Perry Loel

Susan Katz

Daniel S. Beagle

Elaine Fresco

Ron Sherman

Zora L. Kolkey, MFT

Catherine Vibert, producer New Dimensions Radio

Sally Dinsmore

Susan Mogul

Robert A. Rosenstone

Judith Stacey, USC

Stephen Holman

Ellise Holman

Helen E. Tevlin

Bernard Rosen

Jan Lee

Judith Malamut

Ruth Elkin

Alissa Hirshfeld-Flores

Michael Charlesworth

Frank Fried

Mark Cullen

Claire Kahane, UCB

Pamela M. Cooke

Jennifer Kenny, Portland State University

Rabbi Steven B. Jacobs

Marjorie Becker, USC

Hilary McQuie

Janice Steinberg, author

Doris Bittar, Artist, Arab-American

Susan Orlofsky

Ruth Heifetz UCSD

Ruth Wallen, artist, Goddard College

Julie Novkov, University of Oregon

Lisa Henderson, UMass

Gene Warren

Gerald A. Gerash

Dick Walker

Sam Fleischacker, VP Chicago Peace Now

Ben Page

Sara Halprin

Alan Horowitz

Peter Curtis

John Baumann

Debbie Goldman

Jane Garry

Dan Halpern

Roy Money

Jennifer Gwirtz

Dr. William Barclay

Ralph Palmer, Keene State College

George Warburg

ARON KAY

E Haberkern, Center for Socialist History

David Kleiman

Seth Segall, Ph.D.

Racheli Gai

Rev. Natalie Shiras

Gordon Fellman, Brandeis

Pam Rosenthal

Tara Cohen

Corla Varney

Jon Snyder

Dalia Karpel

Sybil Adelman Sage

Susan Littwin, writer

Peter Thacker

Jim Berger, Hofstra

Dr. Michele Ritterman

Larry George

Ellen Greist

Aaron rosenfield

Carmiya Kasse

Rabbi Aryeh Hirschfield, Portland, OR

Rachel Goldstein

Terri Stern

Andrea Resnick

Spencer Pack, Connecticut College

Rachel Antell

Abby Ginzberg, filmmaker

Hope Singer, labor lawyer

Maxine Phillips

Joel Bellman

Roger Waldinger, UCLA

Roger Lowenstein, L.A. Leadership Academy

Mark Schubb

Noah Isenberg

Irena Klepfisz, poet

Alan Mandell

David Theo Goldberg, UCI

Ira Katznelson

Nick Braden

Chuck Munson

Christopher Rhoades Dykema

Mary Ellen Strote, writer, editor

Janet Sternberg, author and photographer

I constantly marvel at the democratic process. It's got a nice self-correcting quality to it that tends to marginalize the marginal, and subvert attempts at "vanguardism".

I hope Not In Our Name is learning something here.

The ANSWER coalition is composed of unreformed Stalinists. They may claim to be on board the opposition to Bush's War but I for one question their motivation. These are the types of people who were apologists for the Gulag, the Liquidation of the Kulaks, and the Great Terror. Some peace activists. They are on board because they see an opportunity to forward their cause - which in the long run is definitely not peace and freedom.

What does a bunch of people putting their name on a

petition have to do with "the democratic process"?

Sounds like you're just another ignorant American who

can't separate symbol ("democracy", "freedom",

"free speech", "the free world", etc. ad nauseam) from

reality.

Your'e all pathetic. The country is in the process of making laws that will make all of you even more irrelevant than you are now. Ooh but let's have our little spat 'cause some rabbi makes us puke. No war in Iraq? Your'e going to stop this war like your'e going to walk down to the beach and order the waves to break backwards. Hussein is going to end up like Mussolini did. The right is united like you imbeciles could'nt be in a million years. Most people in USA would rather bomb San Francisco flat than Baghdad.

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE:

February 12, 2003

CONTACT:

Bert Knorr (510) 644-8071, (415) 307-8028

(cell)

BAY AREA UNITED AGAINST WAR NOT IN OUR NAME PROJECT INTERNATIONAL ANSWER (Act Now to Stop War and End Racism) COALITION UNITED FOR PEACE & JUSTICE

STATEMENT FROM FEB. 16 ANTI-WAR COALITIONS

REGARDING RABBI MICHAEL LERNER

We would like to clarify the misunderstanding regarding Rabbi Michael

Lerner's perception that he was "banned" from speaking at the peace

rally.

His charges are untrue, and we wish to set the record straight.

As the Bush Administration continues its relentless drive toward war,

the

mass mobilizations in cities around the world on the weekend of Feb.

15-16

have taken on great significance. Millions of people are expected to

demonstrate in cities around the world in what may be the last

opportunity

to stop a new war on Iraq before it starts.

In the San Francisco Bay Area, four coalitions -- each comprised of

many

organizations and individuals -- have come together to sponsor a broad

and

united anti-war march and rally on Sunday, Feb. 16.

The four coalitions -- Bay Area United Against War, Not In Our Name

project, United for Peace & Justice, and the International ANSWER (Act

Now

to Stop War & End Racism) Coalition -­ have been working together

successfully for the last several weeks to maximize the turnout on Feb.

16.

One of the first agreements that was made between the groups organizing

the

Feb. 16 anti-war protest was that none of the coalitions would propose

rally speakers who had publicly attacked or worked to discredit one of

the

coalition groups. When members of the Tikkun Community, who have

actively

participated in the organizing meetings for Feb. 16, suggested to Bay

Area

United for Peace and Justice that it propose Michael Lerner as a

speaker,

it was explained by members of UFPJ that since he had publicly attacked

ANSWER in both the New York Times and Tikkun community email

newsletters,

his inclusion in the program would violate the agreement among the Feb.

16

organizing groups.

It was this issue -- Michael Lerner's public attacks against one of the

anti-war coalitions -- that resulted in his not being formally proposed

as

a speaker on Feb. 16; his views on Israel and Palestine had nothing to

do

with it.

Within the anti-war movement, there is a wide spectrum of diverse and

opposing views regarding Israel and Palestine, and those views will be

heard on Feb. 16. On that day, two rabbis, David Cooper and Pam

Frydman-Baugh, both of whose views are similar to those of Michael

Lerner,

will be speaking. To reiterate, the fact that Michael Lerner was not

invited to speak on Feb. 16 was not the consequence of a veto by the

A.N.S.W.E.R. Coalition. None of the coalitions have veto power over the

Feb. 16 program

We strongly abhor all forms of racism and bigotry, including

anti-Semitism.

At the same time, we don't believe that criticism of Israeli government

policies should be labeled as anti-Semitism any more than criticism of

U.S.

government policy should be labeled as anti-American. On the eve of a

terrible war, we call upon everyone to join together in making Feb.

15-16 a

massive and powerful statement for peace and justice. We're heartened

by

the broad range of participation that is developing for Feb. 16,

including

within the Jewish community, and invite one and all to join with us in

our

efforts to stop the war on Iraq.

Issued by: Bay Area United Against War, International A.N.S.W.E.R. (Act

Now

to Stop War & End Racism) Coalition, Not In Our Name Project, United

for

Peace and Justice

A JEWISH VOICE FOR PEACE RESPONSE TO LERNER

A frenzy has been whipped up around the issue of whether or not Rabbi Michael Lerner will speak at the upcoming demonstration in San Francisco, taking place on Sunday, February 16. The accusation that the anti-war movement does not incorporate Jewish voices is a serious one, one that deserves a serious response.

At A Jewish Voice for Peace, we have found close and staunch allies in the anti-war coalition. We have found that our opinion is sought time and time again and that our stance in support for a truly just peace between Israelis and Palestinians and respect for Israeli human rights as well as Palestinians’ has been respected and represented in the speakers that have been chosen. At the upcoming demonstration, Mitchell Plitnick, Director of Administration and Communication for JVP, will speak, along with Israeli

refusenik Ofer Shorr, and Kate Raphael from San Francisco Women in Black, Rabbi Steven Pierce, Rabbi Pam Frydman-Baugh, and Rabbi David Cooper. This represents a broad spectrum of Jewish anti-war views.

Rabbi Lerner's views are welcomed in the coalition. He is an important spokesperson for the movement for peace and justice in Israel and Palestine. It was because he criticized one of the coalition partners, ANSWER, in the New York Times and over TikkunMail, that the coalition, including the Tikkun representative present at the meeting, decided that we were capable of finding another speaker with views similar to his who did not openly attack a coalition partner. Therefore the question of Rabbi Lerner speaking was never even brought before the coalition’s program committee. The proviso that anyone who had taken such action would not be welcomed to speak can be debated, but it was agreed to well in advance by all members of this coalition.

We work with all of our allies to ensure that our movement remains free of anti-Semitism as well as sexism, homophobia, racism, classism and any other form of marginalization. We work hard every day to address the legitimate concerns raised by some in our community regarding their discomfort and feelings of isolation as Jews in the anti-war movement by engaging with both our allies in the peace movement and the Jewish community. We stand in unity with Tikkun in calling for a joint Jewish anti-war, anti-occupation contingent. We stand in unity with the coalition of organizations who are

sponsoring this march in opposing the attack on Iraq. We intend to continue working with both groups, and not choose sides in this destructive conflict.

CHILD MURDERS AND RABBI LERNER

By Israel Shamir

November 21, 2002

Rabbi Michael Lerner published a letter (see below) containing an attempt to attach collective guilt for a single crime to the whole Palestinian people, and to shift the blame for the bloodshed to the victims. The Metzer murder, a revolting crime committed by a deranged individual, is (mis)presented by Michael Lerner as an act of Arafat’s (and Palestinian national) policy. Moreover, it is described as a “Palestinian act of terror”. It is an unacceptable lie. Would we refer to yesterday’s murder of two Palestinian toddlers in Khan Yunes as to “Jewish child-murders”, or even to Mark Rich’s deeds as to “Jewish fraud”, Rabbi Lerner would certainly call it “anti-Semitism”. That is why his letter should be condemned as an incitement to hate.

The deranged criminal from Metzer acted alone, and his action was met with horror by Palestinians and Jews alike. If and when he will be apprehended he will certainly be punished. On the other hand, the murderers of the Palestinian children in Khan Yunes remain at large; they are protected and their crimes condoned by the Jewish state. When a Palestinian girl child was murdered by a Jewish fanatic near Nablous, the witness for defence, Rabbi Yitzhak Ginzburg, claimed a Jew may kill a Goy with impunity. It appears his opinion won the day: practically none of the Jews who murdered three hundred innocent children in Palestine was brought to justice. Hilmi Shusha, a Palestinian child from Husan, was murdered by a settler Naum Korman in the eyesight of the entire village, but the Jewish judge Ruth Orr has sent Nahum Korman, the child murderer, for six months of public service in the old folks house.

Friends of Palestine won’t stoop as low as the late PM Golda Meir, who proclaimed “I can’t forgive the Palestinians that they force us to kill their children”. We won’t lie as the late PM David Ben Gurion who tried to attach blame for the Deir Yassin Massacre to ‘Arab irregulars’, and for Sharon’s massacre in Kibie to the relatives of ‘Arab terror victims’. We won’t try the line of Madeline Albright who thought the murder of Iraqi children was worth its while. Instead, we call to bring to the International Criminal Court every Jewish murderer of Palestinian children.

Rabbi Lerner should pay heed to a recent letter to Haaretz newspaper by Dr Miriam Reik, who wrote:

“Killing kids gets to be routine.

Israel is, in many ways, unique. It is the only country in the world in which a child, throwing a stone, is considered to have committed a capital crime, and a soldier can kill him with a bullet with impunity--no questions asked.

Haaretz reported the death in this fashion yesterday of Mohammed ali Zeiz, a 15 year old, without comment. It is the only country in the world in which the occupying army does not hold its fire when an innocent child is on the scene, much less rush to protect him.

Ibrahim al-Madani, 12 years old, died in this way yesterday, as reported by Haaretz, without comment. We all know of dozens of such incidents, which led Amnesty International to characterize the current conflict as one in which the lives of children are treated with "utter disregard," a charge met with cynical protestations of innocence by the IDF.

However, it is also a sad comment on the general deterioration of standards in Israel, that Haaretz can report such incidents, time and again, without editorial comment. Anything, I suppose, can become routine.

Miriam M. Reik, PhD”

Rabbi Lerner writes: “There is never any moral equivalence between one act of murder and another”. He is absolutely right. That is why, while mourning the dead of Khan Yunes and Metzer, we observe the vast difference between a one-man-crime and an act of the Jewish state-condoned and sponsored child murder.