Israel Independence Day Celebration - May 1, 1998

The Cleveland State Vindicator
Volume 28, Issue 14
May 18, 1998 - May 31, 1998
Letters to the Editor
page 6

     In spite of all the controversy, last Friday's Israel
Independence Day celebration in the Cage was successful. We had
balloons and music. We passed out flyers and felafel. It was a good
turnout. I saw Jewish students I hadn't seen all quarter talking
together and having fun. 
     We had been planning this event for over a month in advance.
There were the forms that we had to fill out and sign, but it was
worth it. The planning and preparations offered an opportunity for
Jewish students to come together to work on something positive. 
     Thanks must be given out to the Hillel Foundation. Hillel has
been helping Tagar with activities throughout the year. It was also
Hillel who brought the felafel (among other things), which was gone
by the end of the day. 
     While I am satisfied with the turnout and thankful for those
who came, I know that there are Jewish students who didn't take the
time to stop by. I know we could have done a little more
advertising, but those Jewish students who heard about it need to
examine themselves as to why they didn't show their solidarity.
Jews have a collective responsibility for one another. 
     After thousands of years of suffering and hope, Jews once
again have sovereignty in their homeland. After 50 years of
suffering and hope, Jews still have sovereignty in their homeland.
This is something that will never be lost. Our pride in this
was demonstated last week at Cleveland State. For more information
on Tagar or other Jewish student activities, please call
691-0066, or e-mail b.bresky@csuohio.edu.

-Binyamin Bresky
junior,
President of Tagar Jewish 
Student Movement



The Cleveland State Cauldron
Vol. 68 No. 50
May 7-10, 1998           
Letters to the Editor 
page 4

Dear Editor, 

"Ki Sheket Hu Refresh" - - Translated from Hebrew, these words
mean "silence is despicable." These are words I live by everyday,
and it is with these words in mind that I write this response to
Michael Oatman's letter, "Jeremy's War." The first thing I would like
to do is set the record straight on the quote from the Lester Mitchell,
Assistant Chief of Police at CSU. Mitchell is quoted as saying "he
took a sign out of the hands of a Muslim student's hands and tried to
rip it up." Now, if Mr. Oatman was there, he would have seen that I
walked over to the students bringing up the sign to show to the
cameras and tried to appeal to a sense of sensitivity and decency. I
was immediately pushed away. My intent was never to grab the
banner and rip it up, but rather to prevent it from being shown on TV.

Mr. Oatman admits he does not know if the banner was offensive
and decides to criticize my actions without even trying to find out
why I acted the way I did. I feel this is irresponsible journalism. The
banner I was trying to prevent from being on TV was one that uses
the words, "Palestinian Holocaust." Using the word, "holocaust," to
describe what is happening to the Palestinians is a desecration to
the memory of the six-million Jews who were systemically murdered
at the hands of the Nazis during World War II. I am in no way saying
that what is happening to the Palestinian people is not horrible or
justified. All I am saying is that it is not a "holocaust," as the word
has come to be understood in our society. When you say,
"holocaust" you invoke memories of The Holocaust. In doing this,
the Muslim Student Association is trying to say that what is
happening to the Palestinians is on the same level as what
happened to the Jews during World War II. This is simply not true.
The Israeli Government is not trying to wipe out the Palestinian
people. If the Israelis were trying to wipe the Palestinians off the
face of the Earth, they would not be involved in a peace process.

The next thing I have a problem with in Oatman's letter is the two
times he refers to me grabbing the camera equipment of the
Channel 3 news crew that was here. I watched the news report of
this event many times on tape and not once did it show me
grabbing the news camera. I also did not see Mr. Oatman anywhere
near the event. Nor does he quote someone who said I grabbed the
camera. So Mr. Oatman is trying to say it's a fact that I grabbed the
camera, without witnessing it himself, either live or on TV or quoting
someone who said it. This again is irresponsible journalism. I never
touched the camera. I did put my hand in front of the lens, but it was
never touching the camera. Since Mr. Oatman felt it necessary to
give me advice, I feel it necessary to give out some of my own. Do
not report events as facts when you clearly have no proof of their
occurrence. This may cause you and the paper you work for many
problems.

Mr. Oatman mentions the procedures we have on campus to deal
with different grievances. Mr. Oatman proceeds to imply I did not
follow the proper procedures and violated the order we have on
campus. Once again, Mr. Oatman writes without having the proper
facts. Tagar had a grievance with the banners that the MSA was
either displaying at the time or was planning to display in the Cage.
A meeting was held in the Student Life office with Dr. Diane Dillard,
Dean of Student Life, members of Student Government, Tagar, and
the MSA. The members of Tagar offered two compromises to the
MSA. The MSA did not want to reach a compromise with Tagar and
thus none was reached. 

Unfortunately, the only agreement that could be made was not to
display any of the banners. All banners that had more than the event
name, sponsoring group, date, time, and place on them would
come down from the UC Cage. The important thing to note is "an
agreement was made not to display the banners." We are not the
ones who called the media. When the media arrived, all our
members were either in class or in UC 5 talking to some Arab
members of the MSA very peacefully. Luqmaan Williams, the leader
of the MSA, was obviously close by since he got right on camera
when they arrived.

Members of the MSA then proceeded to hold their banner that was
hanging in the cage earlier in the same spot it had been hanging in.
I had time to go into Student Life to get someone who made them
take it down. When they started bringing up the other banner from
UC 5, I didn't have as much time. Dan Leubitz was almost finished
giving his interview and the banner was going to be displayed for all
of Cleveland to see on the news. Did I act appropriately? I guess
that is for Mr. Oatman and everyone else to decide for themselves.
I've had people who think I did act appropriately call me and people
who think I did not, also have called me. What Mr. Oatman doesn't
understand is Tagar went through the proper procedures. We also
were prepared to abide by the agreement we made with the MSA.
Apparently, Luqmaan Williams and his group were not. I had a very
small window in time in which to make sure a banner with the words
"Palestinian Holocaust" did not desecrate the memory of the
six-million Jews who were murdered by the Nazis during The
Holocaust, by being displayed on the news.

I don't expect Michael to understand the thoughts and emotions
running through my head at the time. He probably has not heard
stories about how his family, his friends' families, and his people
were systemically murdered by the Nazis during the Holocaust.
What I do expect is that if Michael Oatman or any other writer on the
Cauldron or Vindicator wants to write an article about my or any
other student's actions they do two things; the first is get their facts
straight. Just because you are writing an opinion article does not
give you permission to print non-facts. Two, is talk to me or whoever
the subject of the article is, and at least find out why the subject
acted the way they did. You might find that I didn't act as
inappropriately as you first thought.

Jeremy B. Ginsberg



The Cleveland State Cauldron
Vol. 68 No. 50
May 7-10, 1998
Letters to the Editor
page 6

Dear Editor 

In response to all the hype about the recent CSU banner conflict, I
have a few things to say. To start, it is nothing more than hype.
Despite the fact that this is a serious issue, no one yet has had balls
enough to confront it head-on and speak truthfully about it. Like most
other students, I am embarrassed and, as an Israeli Jew, not a little
indignant about what actually went down here. I operate under the
assumption that CSU is an institute of higher learning and
consequently, populated with reasonably educated people.
Therefore, there are a few major issues that need some edifying
first before anyone can come to a logical conclusion. 

1.Tagar-Hillel is a Jewish-Zionist organization. The support of the
State of Israel is one of the cornerstones of its mission. To display a
banner endorsing the anniversary of Israel's statehood is well within
the bounds of their activities, and this school, by accepting this
organization on campus, has entitled them to do so. The banners
were about as political as posting Happy Birthday banners in the
faculty lounge. It merely stated a fact. Israel, as a nation, is 50 years
old this year-Happy Birthday. I have never yet heard of anyone
posting derogatory banners counterattacking a birthday card or
people marching on a birthday party just because they didn't like the
person. I say this, absurd as it may sound, because this is
essentially the scenario. There were no politically radical statements
made by this sign, which brings us to point two.

2. The MSA banners were hung with malicious intent. They were
reactionary in nature, hung solely as a response to the Tagar and
Hillel ones. The slogans were derisive, derogatory, and written
specifically to provoke a negative response from Tagar-Hillel or any
other pro-Israel person. From the placement of the banners to the
parading about with them, to the very purposeful wording, it is
clearly a protest, and also well within the means of their group.
However, if you feel so strongly about your position, then back it up.
Protest is a healthy part of politics and change. It is a progressive
thing, but only when you can stand by your convictions, and are
willing to take the consequences that go with it. C'mon, say it, for
crying out loud. The word `holocaust' was a specific term directed
toward a group of people who know it primarily as the orchestrated
genocide of 6 million of their own people. Furthermore, that's how
you see it, too. Don't write it down in foot-tall letters and then act
surprised when they make that exact connection. That's why it was
written in the first place: to get that response. It does not, though,
come as any surprise from a group whose leader, Yassir Arafat,
once accepted the Nobel Peace Prize for his part in resolving such
conflict, and then went home and publicly declared jihad on Israel
the same day. And don't compare Middle East hostilities with the
ritualized slaughtering that took place in WWII.

3. The event was aimed toward a negative response. Jeremy
Ginsberg was wrong. However,his reaction is justified. As Tagar's
leader, he should be able to know when he is being played, and rise
to the occasion instead of sinking to a lower level. As a Jew, this
behavior worries me. First because this sort of incident is what puts
a negative spin on public opinion outside of Israel. It certainly didn't
look good on Channel 3. Second, because by wearing a `yarmulke'
consistently in public, he is not only the leader of Tagar-Hillel on this
campus, but an ambassador of every Jew in the world, and right
now, I cannot say I am comfortable with Mr. Ginsberg representing
me and my family. As for MSA, they should be ashamed for their
own actions. It was malicious and hurtful, and did nothing but stir up
hate on this campus. There is no need to bring the violence and
animosity of the Middle East to our peaceful campus. Anger begets
anger, and violence begets violence. As educated students, we
should be beyond that.

4. As for SGA, you guys need to wake the up. You are elected
officials. Don't tell us we need to be apolitical. SGA is the political
body of the school. It is composed entirely of interest groups. You
need to be able to differentiate, however, between a positive
banner supporting an organization's aim, and a negative one that
attacks another group instead of supporting their own. You are there
as much to protect the rights of organizations as to uphold peace
between them. Tagar-Hillel was attacked and slandered, and you
stood by and let it be until it boiled over into violence. Student-body
politics is more than giving out free popcorn. Likewise, all of us
need to learn to be a little more tolerant of others and their
differences, and if you do strongly disagree, then we need to learn
how to find the right forum for discussion. 

           J.J. Perry, student