Responding to Slander

Responding to Slander

Dear Chevra,

Beginning September 2, a slanderous attack — in Jewish law both lashon hara and rechilus — against Rabbis for Human Rights has been circulating in cyberspace. We are posting RHR’s response from its executive director, Rabbi Arik Ascherman to this slanderous article written by David Bedein.

The allegations by Bedein are not just matters of opinion or assessment, but are statements as fact of events that did not happen. In short, lies.

I can attest to one of these out of my own experience. Bedein asserts that some foundation connected with "Beilin" raised the money for the full-page NY Times ad of April 8 that supported the OLIVE TREES campaign.

In fact the money was raised by Break the Silence and especially by myself, Rabbi Mordechai Liebling, former director of the Jewish Reconstructionist Federation and now on the staff of The Shefa Fund, and Cherie Brown, who is director of the Naional Coalition-Building Institute and a world leader of reevaluation counseling, especially its work on reinvigorating Jewish identity and combatting anti-Semitism, and also by a letter signed (and in some cases phone calls made) by Rabbi Daniel Polish, director of the Reform Commission on Social Action, Mark Seal, director of the Jewish Reconstructionist Federation, Rabbi Chaim Seidler-Feller of UCLA Hillel, Arthur Green of Brandeis University (former president of Reconstructionist Rabbinical College), and others.

So I can myself testify that this part of the Bedein slander is a flat lie.

Shalom, Arthur

---

RHR response: I [Rabbi Arik Ascherman] spoke with Jeremy [Milgrom] in Durban tonight and the conversation confirmed that Jeremy has been working within the framework of our mandate and that again David Bedein is attempting to spread poison.

I am enclosing my detailed comments on Bedein's article and the minutes of our board discussion (In Hebrew with English summary) outlining Jeremy's mandate in Durban. Before we get to this broadside, a little history (The relevant documentation is reproduced below:) In April 1999 David Bedein wrote a broadside against RHR containing a number of falsehoods.

After I threatened to go to the ethics board of the Israeli Journalist's Association David finally agreed to allow me to write a response which would be sent out to the recipients of his original broadside. He eventually put on his website a edited version of what I wrote and his response to my corrections, edited in such a way as to be entirely unintelligible. He later claimed that he had sent something out to his mailing list, but refused to send me a cc and as far as I know the exchange on his website was never corrected.

While all this was going on, David attacked us for citing in a press conference that there were 6,000 standing demolition orders. This turned out to be a wrong figure (The real figure being closer to 2,000) because of a misunderstanding with Meir Margolit (although we had ourselves been surprised and asked Meir about this figure a number of times.) regarding the number of orders in Jerusalem.

Although we retracted the figure, David continues to claim that we did not. (See below his article sent to the Anglo Jewish press in May) It is not towards RHR alone that David works with total disregard of journalistic ethics. In conversations with Israeli Conservative rabbis I was given examples examples regarding the Masorti movement where David acted unethically. ANY DISCUSSION MUST BE PUT IN THE PERSPECTIVE OF WHO WE ARE DEALING WITH.

Now, in terms of David's latest attack:

"One Jewish group joined forces with the PLO to support the idea that Israel was indeed, an apartheid, racist regime."

Firstly, we have had no contact with the PLO. We have been in contact with LAW, which has been struggling with the PLO for months to drop the "Zionism is Racism" statements.

Secondly, our board was quite clear in stating that RHR's position would be that while we are honest and open about the Israeli human rights violations against both Jews and Arabs which we deal with, we would not support singling out Israel at Durban.

We could support a document which mentions no country by name or mentions the plethora of human rights abuses around the world, including those in Israel. Our board has also been quite clear in setting the policy that we are opposed to the use of buzz words such as "apartheid." (Minutes reprinted below)

Thirdly, other Israeli human rights organizations such as "B'Tselem" and "Sikui" were also represented. Finally, Jeremy reports that he has been consistent and clear in publicly arguing that calling Israel a racist state, singling out Israel, etc., is counterproductive. He reports that in the mosque appearance with Uri Davis he criticized Davis' position, arguing that calling Israel racist and apartheid was a mistake and eroded the relations between Muslims and Jews in South Africa and elsewhere.

This was covered in the Capetown newspapers. For example, an article in the Cape Times of August 27th reports, "Jeremy Milgrom from Rabbis for Human Rights in Jerusalem also addressed the Gatesville meeting. He said there were fears from the Jewish community that the conflict in the Middle East would worsen the relationship between South African Muslims and Jews."

He said there was concern after calls of "Death to Israel" were heard at the march last week. Milgrom, who also spoke at the Green Point meeting, appealed for a peaceful approach to the conflict, saying: "We will overcome this with our hearts and our faith." But he was not well received. Shouts of "One Zionist, one bullet" could be heard during his speech."

In the LAW panel, the microphone was actually cut off when Jeremy made similar remarks and criticized the use of rhetoric in Durban.

2. RHR is not funded by the Economic Cooperation Foundation. We have participated in meetings which they have sponsored and signed ads which they funded and were within our mandate.

3. PLO legal advocacy group. I have already indicated that LAW is not a PLO organizations, and has had a rocky relationship with the PLO and the PA because of its criticisms of PA and PLO policies on many occasions, including "Zionism is Racism." I also have already mentioned Jeremy's remarks on this panel, indicating that while we went to Durban in coordination with LAW we did not hesitate to differ when necessary. The references to LAW and Davis are attempts to prove guilt by association.

"The Rabbis for Human Rights was able to procure funds for Milgrom to go to Geneva and Durban after its successful eight month campaign raise funds for thousands of olive trees which these Rabbis claim were uprooted from peaceful Arab farmers by nearby Jewish communities who have systematically encroached upon their villages to uproot their olive groves and deprive them of a way of making a living."

Firstly, there is no connection between the Olive Tree Campaign and funding for Durban. Jeremy paid his way to Geneva and the Ford Foundation paid for Durban.

This is an oversimplification of our representation of the olive tree issue. The some 30,000 trees which have been uprooted include trees cut down by settlers and by security forces. Some were in areas where there were real security issues and some weren't, etc. This oversimplification is written to imply that we have no awareness of or sympathy for security issues. Again, we separate between attacking those who are attacking us and the collective punishment of innocent civilians.

4. "To promote their "Olive Tree campaign" the Rabbis For Human Rights also placed included a full page ad in April in the New York Times." This ad was placed with our knowledge in the Times and gives prominence to RHR and the Olive Tree Campaign, but was clearly not our ad.

According to Rabbi Ascherman, "the costs of the ad were covered by the ECF..." A total falsehood. The ECF had nothing to do with it and I certainly never claimed that they did.

5. Over the past few months, journalists have asked the Rabbis for Human Rights to verify their claim that Jews in nearby towns have been raiding Arab villages to chop down their olive trees. The Rabbis for Human Rights cannot provide even one eyewitness or one police complaint.

When pressed to provide evidence that Jews are indeed uprooting olive trees in Arab villages, the response is that "We just know that this is happening", in the words of Rabbi Arik Ascherman, the director of the Rabbis for Human Rights, saying that he relies on reports from the PLO concerning allegations of "Olive Tree Uprooting."

Whenever journalists have asked us for evidence we have always offered to take people to see for themselves. One can visit the Harres area, for example, and see where trees were cut down near roads and where they were cut down away from roads. One can see trees cut down adjacent to settlements and we know that, for example 25-30 trees a night were cut down in the middle of the night after our joint Jewish-Israeli olive harvest last November. The army is very upfront when they cut down trees and one can know which trees were cut down by the army and which by others. I have never said that we rely on PLO reports.

6. "Rabbi Ascherman referred to an Israeli activist, Neta Golan, who has been living in these Arab villages to provide what she describes as 'eyewitness testimony of Israeli human rights abuses'. Rabbi Ascherman neglected to mention that Neta spend the good part of the past ten years incarcerated in mental health institutions both in Israel and in Canada." Firstly, Neta is only one of our sources. Secondly, I have no knowledge of Neta having been institutionalized, although I have no proof that this is not true. In any case, David is playing on stereotypes about people with mental health problems. Were this allegation to be true he would still need to prove that this challenged the veracity of what she reports, and that he is not merely exploiting stereotypes.

7. "Whenever Ascherman was asked about the distribution of funds collected by 'Rabbis for Human Rights', Rabbi Arik Ascherman became suddenly vague." I have always clear that money would be distributed to families in consultation with local contact people aware of the needs and that we would replant trees during the planting season starting in the Harres area and expanding depending on how far the funds go.

8. "Which contacts? Ascherman identified the LAW organization....The LAW spokesman, Arjan El Fassed explained, that while LAW is not a humanitarian organization per se, he mentioned that monies that they receive from the Rabbis for Human Rights go to the families of the 'martyrs' ...Asked to define what he means by 'martyrs', El Fassed described the various attacks in which Palestinians have died in attacks on Israelis.

"In other words, the Rabbis for Human Rights have been providing funds for the families of suicide bombers."

This is a total falsehood. We have never given a shekel to LAW.

9. "Arjan El Fassed mentioned that the the Rabbis for Human Rights are also providing funds for the PLO's Land Defense Committee, another PLO lobbying group." The LDC is not a PLO organization. We have never given them a penny either. They are one of our primary partners in the struggle against home demolitions. We have in the past helped to fund the rebuilding of homes. None of those funds went to the LDC or even through the LDC.

"Ascherman also indicated that when PA representatives come to RHR, ask for money for families, and Ascherman that he doles it out to them because he trusts them." We don't work with the PA and funds from the Olive Tree Campaign are paid directly to families. It is true that our main contact person in Harres works as a liaison between the Palestinians and Israelis, but we do not work with him in that capacity. In this case he is one of a group of people who advise us as to which families need aid.

CORRESPONDENCE WITH DAVID BEDEIN:

In April 1999 I received the following email and wrote the following response to David Bedein:

have you seen this? To: David Newman newman@bgumail.bgu.ac.il Subject: FW: Rabbis who ignore human right

— On Sun, 18 Apr 1999 04:34:44 +0300 media wrote:
David Beden (ne Bedein), MSW Media Research Analyst Bureau Chief Israel Resource News Agency Beit Agron Int'l Press Center POB 2265 37 Hillel Street Jerusalem, Israel "Israel Resource Review" Website magazine: www.israelvisit.co.il/BehindTheNews

Ten years ago, a group known as the Rabbis for Human Rights, a recipient of grants from the New Israel Fund and the Ford Foundation, was formed to relate to the human rights and civil liberties of the non-Jew in the land of Israel, within the context of the mitzvah that commands the Jew to protect and defend the Ger Toshav, the non-Jew who is entitled by Jewish Law to live in Eretz Yisrael with full rights protected.

Yet the Rabbis for Human Rights have chosen to betray the human rights and civil liberties of Palestinian Arabs, who fall into the category of "Ger Toshav".

The Rabbis for Human Rights have instead chosen to identify and coordinate its actions with the PLO, the Palestinian Authority and UNRWA, which are the very authorities who are reponsible for the denial of human rights and civil liberties to Palestinian Arabs.

As a matter of policy, The Rabbis for Human Rights have maintained a silence in the face of daily executions orchestrated by the Palestinian Authority and the PLO.

The Rabbis for Human Rights have been silent in the wake of corrupt practices of the PA and the PLO that have stolen countless properties from Palestinian Arab people.

The Rabbis for Human Rights have been silent in the wake of UNRWA policies that continue to confine one million Palestinian Arabs to the shacks that they were assigned to in 1949, under the specious premise and promise of the "right of return" to the homes that they left in 1948 in Jerusalem, Jaffa, Haifa, and hundreds of other places.

The Rabbis for Human Rights have been silent in the wake of calls from Palestinian lawyers and jurists who have cried out against the injustices of the new Palestinian Authority legal system.

The Rabbis for Human Rights have been silent in the wake of the new official curriculum that the Palestinian Authority school system has adopted that forbids the teaching of reconciliation between Arabs and the state of Israel.

The Rabbis for Human Rights has instead chosen a path of collaboration with the forces that oppress the Palestinian Arab people.

The Rabbis for Human Rights continues to revere an unfortunate aspect of the legacy of Yitzhak Rabin, who declared on numerous occasions that the Oslo process concept of peace would create a Palestinian regime devoid of human rights organizations and courts of justice, "BLI BAGATZ V'BLI BITZELEM".

Yes, the Israeli government, which holds 63% of the purse-strings of the Palestinian Authrity annual budget, is to be held accountable, together with the advocates of the Oslo process who have advocated the imposition of Arafat and the PLO on the Palestinian Arab people.

And to those who would ascribe to the notion that Arafat was "democratically elected" in January 1996, one need look no far than official UN observer Pinchas Inbari, the AL HAMISHMAR journalist who documented at the time of the Palestinian elections that Arafat declared that anyone running against him without his written approval would be disqualified. The day after that rule was made, a bomb blew up in the home of the one serious candidate who was running against Arafat for president of the Palestinian Authority, "convincing" him to withdraw his candidacy.

As the gendarmes of the Palestinian Authority tighten their grip each day on the Palestinian Arab people, the question remains, will the Rabbis for Human Rights continue to stand idly be the blood of their brothers?

The children of Abraham wait for an answer.

We responded: Dear David, Whatever our disagreements on certain issues, I always took you at your word that you attempt to uphold values of ethical journalism. Your broadside against RHR, is not only an escalation of your attempts to complain about me to Levi, but contains a great deal of false information which you put out without checking your facts. To begin with, our mandate is not only to defend the human right of non-Jews, but as a universal human rights organizations. It is true that the majority of our efforts have been on behalf of non-Jews. However, from our past work on behalf of Ethiopian Jews to our present work to preserve the Israeli health care system, it is simply not true to state that we were formed to defend the rights of non- Jews only. Secondly, it is a simple lie to say that we coordinate our actions with the PA or UNRWA. In fact, I believe I sent you once our statement when we met with Chairman Arafat in which, much to his dislike, we questioned his human rights policies. The Palestinian organizations we work most closely with are organizations which operate independently of the PA and UNRWA, and have their own criticisms of the PA's policies. I can also send you the protocol of our March board meeting, where it was decided to express our concern to the PA regarding their use of capital punishment. It is true, that, as a rabbinical organization, our primary mission is to speak to the Jewish people, not the PA. However, we have always done what we can to support Palestinian human rights activists, protest their encarceration, etc. I truly hope that you will restore my faith by allowing me to write a statement along the lines of what appears above, which you will send out to your network, along with an apology on your part.

B'Vrakha, Arik

Eventually David committed himself:

Dear Rav Arik,

I had thought that I had asked to delay the letter-exchange until after the elections. If I had not communicated that, my fault completely.

I shall prepare my position in 300 words and forward it to you by the end of this week, and will ask for your response. The letter and your response will be shared by everyone who receives my newsletter, and it will be posted on my website magazine.

B'vracha Raba,

David

As part of his avoiding the issue of the corrections, David began focussing on the figure of 6,000 standing orders. We acknowledged our mistake:

Dear David,

To the best of my knowledge, you have not yet kept your commitment to sending out your article with my unedited response. I will check your website to see whether or not you changed what was posted there as I requested. I know that it is not a matter of time on your part, as you were able to forward your accusations regarding our figures on demolition orders.

If these two matters have not been corrected by Wednesday, I will have to report your unwillingness to correct falsehoods, as we originally discussed last spring.

Regarding the demolition figure, I spoke with Meir Margolit today. I did, in fact, misunderstand Meir's figures, and he is going to try and obtain a figure regarding actual standing orders. We do stand corrected. As I told you, when I received them, I asked him repeatedly if they were correct, but didn't understand that he was speaking about illegal buildings and not orders. My estimate is that, in addition to the 2,000 standing orders in Area C (That figure stands. Meir is not an authority on the reliability of the Land Defense Committee or the number of orders in Area C. I again invite you to speak with them directly, if you are interested.), there are 50 - 100 standing orders in Jerusalem. (Jerusalem tends to use time limited administrative orders.) I believe that the number of people who have received this information is relatively limited, seeing as our written material still contains the old number of 2,000. In addition, the difference between 2,000 and 6,000 does not in any way change the issues. Regarding my response to your piece, the number can be changed to "2,000 plus."

You can use our retraction of the number 6,000, but only if you publish our revised estimate of 2,000. TO USE OUR CORRECTION IN ANY OTHER WAY WILL CONSTITUTE AN IMPROPER AND UNAUTHORIZED USE OF OUR CORRECTION.

The only connection between my request that you uphold your commitments and the correction of the 6,000 figure is regarding the revision of my response. I will not accept any further requests on your part in this matter as an excuse for delaying the upholding of your months old commitment. I have a great deal of work to do, and will only respond to you on this or any other issue after you have upheld your commitments or after I have passed this on to the media board.

Arik - Dear David,

First of all, your latest statement is another falsehood. Our statement to Arafat was released to the press. At your request two years ago, we issued a statement, faxed to you, regarding the honoring of agreements concerning extradition of murderers. Even if your statement was true, it would not justify the falsehoods which you have published. You continue to ignore all the falsehoods which I delineated. You can publish your opinion about us. You can call into question our feeling that our primary mandate as rabbis is to speak to our own people, not the PA. However, your refusal to correct clear the falsehoods which you published is a betrayal of your profession. I continue to hope that you will restore my belief in you as an honest journalist.

B'Vrakha, Arik

From: media media@actcom.co.il
To: Rabbis For Human Rights (by way of media media@actcom.co.il)
Date: ??? ??? 19 ????? 1999 20:01 Subject: Re:

The RABBIS FOR HUMAN RIGHTS have held internal discussions and sent private letters to the PA concerning PA human rights abuses. The question remains: when will RHR raise their voices on the matter? The continuing abuses, beginning with PA-countenanced murders, warrant a public outcry. There is nothing in the public record concerning any RHR moral outrage raised against the UNRWA policy of confining Palestinian Arab to the squalor of refugee camps under the premise and promise of the right of return to homes that no longer exist. The fact that the PA supports such policies deserves attention. dsb

I can't find the full Bedein article from this past May, but here are excerpts, David Mivasair's response and my first response: ". . . .Because of my continued concern for this issue of arbitrary home demolitions, I attended the press conferences of Rabbis for Human Rights, held on several occasions in 1999, in which RHR claimed that Israel has ordered the demolition of 6,000 illegally built Arab homes.

When I asked Rabbis for Human Rights for the source of their "6,000" figure, they referred me to Jerusalem city councilman Meir Margolit, who claimed that he had stated that there were at least 6,000 illegal homes, not that 6,000 were going to be demolished. Instead, Margolit explained, there were between 129 and 152 homes that had received demolition orders. I wrote to Rabbis for Human Rights to ask them if they would revise their claim of "6,000" homes about to be destroyed. they wrote me back, repeating their claim. The "6,000" figure was widely publicized in the foreign media and >uqoted in an Amnesty International report.. . ." Further on, regarding the choping of olive trees by settlers:"

This year, RHR has continued its policy of blowing human rights allegations out of all proportion. It has conducted an international campaign in which it claims that Israeli Jewish citizens of Samaria have engaged in a policy of chopping down olive trees in Arab villages, beginning with the Arab village of Harres.

RHR has taken its campaign to CNN, the BBC and even taken out a full-page ad on the pages of the New York Times in this regard. Three journalists have asked Rabbis for Human Rights what evidence they have for any allegations that "Jewish settlers" have invaded Arab villages to chop down their olive trees. "RHR cannot provide any evidence. 'We just know that this is happening,' said the director of the organization.' "Meanwhile, at a time when the Israeli police openly seek out and pursue complaints from Arab civilians against Jews in Judea and Samaria, no complaint has been filed against Jewish settlers.. . " And so on.

Dear editor, The Bulletin's special report "Group Can't Back Up Claim" is itself unbelievable. The article attempts to discredit the Israeli organization Rabbis for Human Rights and to deflect attention away from undeniable widespread Israeli settler violence against Palestinians in the West Bank. I've been in Israel since last August.

There is no question in my mind that the allegations of Rabbis for Human Rights concerning settler violence are true. I personally went to the village of Harres following the incident discussed in the special report. In the previous weeks, villagers were unable to harvest their own olive groves, a mainstay of their economy, because they had been physically harrassed and shot at by settlers from Revava, a settlement built since the beginning of the peace process negotiations on lands that had for generations belonged to Harres families.

The people of Harres asked Rabbis for Human Rights and other Jewish volunteers to accompany them into their orchards so they could harvest at least some of their crop without being attacked. While I was there, I saw olive trees that had been recently cut down along the orchard's perimeter with the settlement of Revava and nowhere else. Settlers from Revava were verbally abusive and physically threatening even to me. When I asked Israeli soldiers who rushed to the confrontation why they let the settlers attack the Arabs earlier, they simply said they were there to protect the Jews from the Arabs and not the other way around. Settlers personally told me the trees endangered their security and they were glad to be rid of them. More trees were cut down that night. Harres villagers told me that settlers from Revava who they personally recognize came and took the very topsoil of their fields to put into their own new gardens, destroyed Arab farmers' irrigation equipment, shot into their houses and water tanks, smashed their cars and set fire to several workshops and businesses.

Only several days earlier, Israeli activist Neta Golan witnessed settlers coming at night and shooting out of their car into the village. They drove away toward Revava when she yelled at them in Hebrew through a bullhorn and read out the license number of their car. A fifteen-year-old boy was wounded in that night's unprovoked and undefended attack. The reality that I witnessed in Harres and elsewhere, only a small glimpse of which have I written about above, is replicated daily throughout the West Bank and Gaza. I've seen it with my own eyes.

We who love and support Israel accomplish nothing by denying that reality. Rabbis for Human Rights, B'Tzelem, the Israel Association for Civil Rights and many other highly credible and widely respected Israeli organizations act on both the moral and pragmatic principle that we are responsible for stopping our own people's continuing violations of the fundamental human rights of our neighbors in this land.

B'Shalom, Rabbi David Mivasair

Dear Joel, I am on a tour in the US and am only going to answer briefly.

1. I have a policy of not responding to David Bedein because in 1998 he launched a broadside against us which contained numerous inaccuracies. This can happen innocently. However, he didn't carry through on his promise to send my unedited corrections to original recipients. When he begins to act as a responsible journalist I will be happy to respond to him as I always did until that point.

2. We acknowledged our innocent error on the 6,000 number. There are over 2,000 standing demolition orders today in Area C. In Jerusalem generally time bound administrative orders are used. We know of intentions to demolish some 19 homes at the moment.

3. I have no idea who these 3 alleged journalists were. I recall one email or phone correspondence in which I offered to take somebody out to see the trees in question (or what remains of them). The offer still stands.

4. I highly recommend B'Tselem's report on the actions of settlers during this intifada. You can download it at www.btselem.org.

B'Vrakha,
Rabbi Arik W. Ascherman,
Executive Director

Summary of Hebrew minute

1. The RHR board expressed great concern for expected Israel bashing at Durban.

2. The RHR board decided:

a. Not to sign anything which singles out Israel b. To coordinate and get advice from other Israeli and Jewish organizations and individuals before the conference. c. To coordinate at Durban with our fellow Israeli human rights organizations d. To be in touch with our office in Israel as needed. e. We had no consensus as to whether there was a point at which we should walk out, or whether we should try to lobby regarding the concluding document or simply concentrate on networking. f. To explore the possiblity of a joint declaration with Palestinians which deals with Israeli human rights violations in a balanced way.

Rabbis For Human Rights info@rhr.israel.net Tel. 972 2 563-7731 Fax: 972 2 566-2815 Mobile: 972 50 607034 Website: http://www.rhr.israel.net