I Was Wrong About Columbia’s ‘Lionpac’’s Offer for Nakba Dialogue

by Philip Weiss on May 6, 2008 · 4 comments

The other day I did a post saying that Arab students at Columbia were right to turn down the offer from the mini-Israel lobby at the school, called Lionpac, to have a private meeting about Nakba week and other public events involving Palestine. Lionpac wishes to try and end the rancor on campus over these issues. Columbia has been riven by these questions for many years now, and Jacob Shapiro of Lionpac was basically saying, Let’s stop having divisive fights. While in another statement, Lionpac implied that the Nakba in fact took place. Thereby not going in for the usual denial.  

It was stupid and insensitive of me to say that there shouldn’t be dialogue. Of course there should be dialogue; I think the Arab students ought to accept Lionpac’s terms with the hospitality that is so often ascribed to Arabs. Big deal, it’s a private meeting. As Richard Witty pointed out, lots of people seek private meetings for lots of reasons. Maybe good can come of this.

My irritation reflected a sense that the Zionist kids want to bottle this stuff up in private. But they can’t; the issues are bigger than that. Also something that Zach Wales, a former grad student, told me last year: "I can’t stand dialogue… It ends up being an atonement session for people who support Israel, but feel the moral burden." A good point. So what. Arabs and Zionsts should meet. We used to use the words "raise consciousness." Maybe such a meeting would do that. I need to raise mine too.

Related posts:

  1. Israelis at Columbia Express Fear of Arabs
  2. Columbia’s Israel Lobby Says Let’s Talk About the Nakba– in Private
  3. Nakba Commemoration at Columbia U. This Week
  4. Where ‘Dialogue’ Doesn’t Work, and Does
  5. Nakba Hits Upper Broadway (When Will It Hit Times Square?)

{ 4 comments }

1 Richard Witty May 7, 2008 at 1:26 am

I hope that it happens.

My best fantasy would be a joint presentation in which the students of Lionpac are asked to publicly introduce the Palestinian advocates, summarizing their understanding of the experience of Palestinians in general, and of specific story that they are aware of, then turning the floor over to the Palestinians to clarify and elaborate.

And then parallel, that the Palestinian students publicly introduce the Israeli experience, summarizing the experience of Jews and Israelis, then turning the floor over to the Israeli/Jewish group.

The winner being the one that "cuts the pie equally". (When I was a kid, when my aunt – not the one that Phil knew – had to reconcile between us greedy kids over cake or something, she would have one cut the cake then the other pick which piece they wanted. So, the person that cut the cake made out the best if he/she cut it as equally as possible.)

2 Montag May 7, 2008 at 2:44 am

The trouble with private meetings is that unscrupulous people can publicly tell lies about what happened in the meeting to their own advantage. Senator Joe McCarthy was a master at this, which is why the Army-McCarthy Hearings were televised–so EVERYONE could see what was going on. If the Zionists aren't intending to do this, then why are they insisting that the meeting be private?

There's a story that at about the turn of the 20th Century Black and White Dockworkers went on strike in New Orleans. The Bosses wanted to hold private meetings with only the White Union representatives because it would be demeaning to meet with Blacks. So the Dockworkers held a vote on it, and overwhelmingly insisted that BOTH White and Black Union representatives would attend or no negotiations.

Why did they do this? Because they understood from past history that it was a ploy. As soon as the doors closed behind the White Union representatives the Bosses would bawl to the Black Dockworkers, "Black Man, the White Man is selling you out! They're only looking out for the White boys, so you'd best make a deal for yourselves on our terms." The only way to prevent this was to have Blacks in the meeting as well.

3 otto May 7, 2008 at 7:29 am

Of course everyone should meet everyone, but in fact what the US needs is more divisiveness over its policy towards the Palestinians, since all attempts to hide conflict will benefit the Jewish colonialist status quo.

4 liberal white boy May 7, 2008 at 7:35 am

"I can’t stand dialogue… It ends up being an atonement session for people who support Israel, but feel the moral burden."

Our poor always suffering Jewry. The weight on this poor mans shoulders must be unbearable at times. This sounds like, I support Adolf but feel a moral burden that I don't care to talk about. So progressive our Zionists.

Speaking of Adolf

Death of Four Palestinian Babies Self Inflicted According To Israeli Military Investigation

http://homo-sapien-underground.blogspot.com/2008/05/death-of-four-palestinian-babies-self.html

Comments on this entry are closed.

Previous post: Journalism 101: Don’t Use ‘Wow’ and ‘Holocaust’ in the Same Sentence

Next post: The World Will Play a Role in Our Election This Time