The lives of Gaza's Arabs will not be improved by expelling its Jews

[Resolution_242]

`
The lives of Gaza's Arabs will not be improved by expelling its Jews

http://jewishworldreview.com/jeff/jacoby050905.php3

May 9, 2005
By Jeff Jacoby

An up close and personal look at life in the disputed territories that's rarely reported on

ADID — Plots of flowers grow outside most of the homes we pass as we drive through this small agricultural cooperative in southern Gaza. I point out a particularly lavish one, and the driver, a gruff 55-year-old, stops the car.

"What are those white ones?" I ask, motioning through the window. "And those yellow ones with the orange tips?"

<...>

When those founders arrived, Jewish Gaza was all yearning and no agriculture: These settlements were mostly built on barren sand dunes where no one lived and nothing grew. Today it is a horticultural powerhouse, supplying two-thirds of the organic vegetables and cherry tomatoes Israel exports, and renowned for its bug-free lettuce and other greens. Gaza's legal status may be complicated (it is technically an unallocated portion of the League of Nations' 1922 Palestine Mandate), but the moral status of this land is as clear as day: As a matter of justice and sweat equity, the Jewish homesteaders whose faith and hard work have made the sand dunes bloom surely have as much right to their homes in Gadid and Neveh Dekalim as the Arabs have to theirs in nearby Khan Yunis and Dir El Balah.

Yet in just 10 weeks, if Prime Minister Ariel Sharon's "disengagement" program goes forward, the 8,000 Jews who live in Gaza — men, women, and a great many children — will be expelled. Their homes and property will be taken over by the Palestinian Authority. And the green revolution that has transformed Gaza's sandy wastes into an oasis of hothouses, nurseries, and flower gardens will almost certainly come to an end.

It will be a tragic upheaval. But Jews won't be the only victims of Sharon's plan.

At Tnuvot Katif, a large produce packaging plant here, I watch for a while as about two dozen workers, most of them local Arabs, get heads of tall leaf lettuce for export. More than half of Tnuvot's 127 year-round employees are Arab; they in turn account for about 2 percent of the 3,500 Arabs employed by Gaza's Jewish firms.

During a break in the shift, I ask some of workers if they like their jobs. They shrug — rinsing and bagging lettuce is no one's idea of exciting work. But when I ask what they think of the coming Israeli withdrawal from Gaza, they grow animated. If the Israelis go, some of them tell me through an interpreter, they'll lose their jobs. If this plant shuts down, they'll be out of work, and if the Palestinian Authority takes it over, they'll still be out of work — the jobs will go to workers with better connections to the PA's ruling thugs.

"If that's how you feel," I ask, "why don't you oppose the disengagement publicly? Why don't you tell the PA that you want your Jewish neighbors to stay?"

When my question is translated, the men look at me as if I'm crazy.

"It's forbidden!" replies Randoor, the only one of the workers who would give even his first name. "We're not allowed to say that!"

I press him: Why not? What would be so bad about saying that Jews and Arabs should be able to live together? But Randoor shakes his head and crosses his wrists, as if being handcuffed. "They might put us in jail," he says. "They might call us 'collaborators.' " In the jungle that is Palestinian society, being called a "collaborator" can be a death sentence. Indeed, the PA's newly elevated security chief — a cold-blooded killer named Rashid Abu Shabak — is known in Gaza as the "collaborator hunter." In recent years, reports Khaled Abu Toameh of the Jerusalem Post, Abu Shabak has "hunted down" scores of Palestinians accused of helping Israel prevent terror attacks. Who knows what he might do any Palestinian who would dare to call for the Israelis to stay?

All the world over, politicians and pundits are applauding Sharon's coming retreat. Yet a simple lettuce-packer like Randoor seems to grasp what so many of them cannot: The lives of Gaza's Arabs will not be improved by expelling Gaza's Jews

JWR contributor Jeff Jacoby is a Boston Globe columnist. Comment by clicking

[NorthernSpy]

1. Jeff Jacoby: far-right plagiarist

Why the hell does Jacoby still enjoy employment in journalism?

[Resolution_242]

2. "Far Right"? The Boston Globe and you don't even know "Far Right"

As you have no rebuttal for the simple straightforard article and proposition therein.. you try and attack the source.

It's amazing how people ON the Far Left don't know where the center is.

Jacoby, the moderately conservative Boston Globe Columnist is certainly more credible than the Far Left 'alternet' and [e-mail] LOL.

As to the Charge [e-mail]/'alternet' makes?

"...That battle continued Monday when editors at the Boston Globe came under fire for issuing a career-threatening four-month suspension to Jeff Jacoby for "serious journalistic misconduct" stemming from his July 3 column.

"They've done a great injustice by smearing him," declared Roger Arnoff, a media analyst at Accuracy in Media, a watchdog group that monitors press organizations.
"It certainly looks like a case of media bias," Mr. Arnoff added, alluding to the fact that the Globe, despite a daily readership of 1.4 million that makes it New England's largest newspaper, has No Other Conservative columnists on its staff.

The controversy surrounding Mr. Jacoby began when the columnist submitted a piece that highlighted the courage and sacrifices made by those who signed the Declaration of Independence.

According to Jacoby, the piece was inspired by other similar commentaries – by Rush Limbaugh, Paul Harvey and an anonymous author -- that have been making the rounds in cyberspace, via e-mail.

The anonymous commentary, though popular on the Internet, had been alleged to contain inaccuracies. Jacoby tried to set the record straight by checking the facts and writing his own account of the oft-told tale.

PRIOR to the Fourth of July, Jacoby e-mailed copies of his column to friends and fans – including to the editors of FrontPageMagazine.com -- with the following note attached:

>>>"Please note: This is NOT a mere rewrite of an anonymous piece that has been making the rounds on the Internet. That one is well-meant, but much of it isn't actually true. What follows should stand up to scrutiny. Have a great Fourth of July. – JJ" <<<

Jacoby's editors contended that his piece was too similar to the other accounts of the signing of the Declaration that had inspired it. The Globe denied him the opportunity to clarify his sources through a printed correction. Instead, they handed down the suspension late Friday afternoon.

In a statement issued Monday morning, Jacoby defended his position. "Since I was relating lore that has been related over and over, and since all of the sources I had relied on had relied on even earlier recitations, I assumed that all the material in my column was in the public domain. It never occurred to me to include a line pointing out that I was far from the first to write about the fates of the Declaration's signers. Had I added such a line, Globe officials tell me, none of this would be happening."

Editors at the Globe stopped short of accusing Mr. Jacoby of plagiarism. Nonetheless, Globe Publisher Richard Gilman told the Associated Press that "We cannot look the other way if any of our columnists, reporters, or writers borrow from the works of others, even in an attempt to improve upon it."

Commentators widely denounced this view as iron-fisted. Matt Drudge, creator of The Drudge Report, protested the move on Monday by disconnecting all the links from his web site to the Globe, declaring, "The Boston Globe has been suspended." A growing number of posters on the popular conservative message board Freerepublic.com are likewise declaring their intention to boycott the Globe.

Village Voice columnist and acclaimed free-speech champion Nat Hentoff also came to Mr. Jacoby's defense. Mr. Hentoff told FrontPageMagazine.com that "Jeff's a very valuable guy who provides good analysis. He would have been wiser to give at least one citation, but I don't think it was plagiarism." Mr. Hentoff added, "I've never known anything to doubt about his integrity.".."

http://ww.frontpagemag.com/Articles/ReadArticle.asp?ID=3266

[not systems]

3. front page is a hate site. n/t

[ibid]

4. Jacoby is not evil, and he is not only conservative on Globe

maybe conservatives for the past 20 years are now "center" at Accuracy in Media - but they are still conservatives in Boston!

:-)

but his point on the gain that Arabs should expect being nil is confirmed by the 40% of Baghdad that was Jewish in 1948 becoming about 30 people today after the Bath'ist party got though hanging the 11 innocent Jewish folks in 1968 so as to prove their (Iraqi) loyalty to the Palestinian cause - 40% of the area taken over/stolen with no right of return (the Jews could not even take photos with them into exile as that might become a political statement). A right of return that one does not hear much about. Indeed compensation for those Jews does not seem to be on the table this gov change time around either.

I certainly do not hear of the benefits the country got by stealing from the Jews.

[Resolution_242]

5. Guess again

`
""...Jacoby was the only conservative columnist on the Globe's Op-Ed pages. Steve Bailey, another Globe columnist, told Howard Kurtz, media writer for The Washington Post: "The guy's opinions were never welcomed in this building. ... One mistake, and he's gone. It's hard to imagine there wasn't some connection with his conservative views." ..."

Nat Hentoff, of Village Voice fame.
(On this board VV is what?.. too close to the 'Right', with Chomsky being 'dead center'? and Che Guevarra just 'a bit Left' for you ;^) )

And read the rest at:
http://www.massnews.com/past_issues/2000/9_Sept/900jac.htm

[ibid]

6. Same crime as Jason Leopold - but Jacoby also lied - I have been

pointing this out to Christine Chinlund, the Globe's reader representative, for a few years now and getting nowhere (Jacoby's using Rush type right wing lies as a reference when truth is avaiable via google is just being lazy - or being a liar - there are many ways to lie - and partial truth is the standard GOP method). That being said Jacoby did not invent crap as they do on Fox Cable news - which I guess maked him moderate right.

Joan Vennochi tore up the Dems the last few years so perhaps she is at least center-right - and the occassional columns of Canellos, Bailey, Bray do not seem on left - at least in my memory. Charles Stein's economics is to the right, and Alex Beam is also to the right.

Scot Lehigh tends to the center with some center right and some cemter left, and Derrick Z. Jackson and Ellen Goodman are usually on the left or center-left, and Thomas Oliphant is a straight truth teller but from the left.

Now Eileen McNamara and Brian McGrory and Adrian Walker are center - I mean a person in the center can be a critic of a Bush lie now and then, can't they? - and Rich Barlow's Spiritual Life religious issues column is certainly not left of center or right of center.

So perhaps the E&P story should describe Jacoby as on the far right and a liar, or at least the farthest right of the staff, rather than the only person on the right..

That being said, I like having Jacoby at the Globe - and would miss him - I just want him to check with others not on Rove's fax machine hot line of lies.

On edit - I forgot to answer your question re Nat Hentoff "of Village Voice free speech fame" - Nat stopped being a flaming liberal a long time ago - and I read him as "center" at best :-)

Chomsky is neither right or left most of the time - just a truth teller. Indeed he is a bit too calm in person - the right is screwing the world and now we will have dinner! I have never heard anyone show Chomsky to be incorrect as to his major calls. The fact he sees the corporate control and speaks about it may well mean the NYTimes sees him on the left, and others may put him down as a conspiracy nut, but my personal experience indicates the corporate world is as he describes. I have not heard him insist on a socialist solution if there was more than one way to solve a problem.

Now Che Guevarra's left leaning is a given, as was his willingness to use force. I disagree with the use of force, and adnire his left leaning thoughts. But after hard right corporate/mafia/right wing GOP whore Batista, Che actually was only "a bit Left" - :-) at least "for me"

:-)

By the way Howard Kurtz is a right wing liar - and is not a "media critic" unless you are talking about what his byline says or you are trying for a laugh.

:-)