Peter Applebome’s column on the anti-Israel lecture that the Greenwich Library censored and then allowed to take place suffered from the weary tone that many journalists adopt when they do Israel/Palestine stories. The Oh-my, don’t people get worked up over this issue tone. It always strikes me as defensive, i.e., the reporter is unable to look headon at the fact that this is one of the most important problems American policymakers, and our people, face.
That said, Applebome is a fine reporter and he delivered a couple of insights:
it was hard to miss the atmospherics in the room as well, the palpable
split between Ms. Weir’s supporters, who seemed to hang on every word,
and her critics, overwhelmingly Jewish, seething in their seats….
When the speech ended, Ms. Weir was met with thunderous applause,
and across the room there was a widespread sense of satisfaction that
someone was saying what needed to be said.“It’s true that our
money is going there to kill little kids,” said one well-dressed woman,
who spent the speech nodding in agreement and gave only her first name,
Jean. “It’s the side we don’t hear, that doesn’t get on the news.”
The serious questions raised by this report are: When the Israel lobby says that supporting Israel is an American value, that Americans support Israel willingly, how true is this on the ground? The support would seem to be overwhelmingly Jewish-driven, no? Who are those unnamed Israel-dislikers mobbing the Greenwich Library? Is there widespread reaction in America today against our Israel policy? How strong is that feeling, and who is having it? I imagine the Times will get right on that…
