The protest against the Toronto International Film Festival’s City to City program with Tel Aviv continues to grow. Organizers have announced that their letter of protest has collected over 1,000 signatures. From a press release titled "Toronto Declaration Unstoppable":
The organizers of the Toronto Declaration – No Celebration of Occupation are pleased to announce that more than 1000 people from around the world-including many Israelis-have signed on in protest of TIFF’s City-to-City Spotlight on Tel Aviv. New signatories include music and cinematic legends Harry Belafonte and Julie Christie. Actor Viggo Mortensen, who will be attending this year’s festival, just added his name. Leading intellectual figures Noam Chomsky, Judith Butler and Anne McClintock have also recently endorsed the declaration, along with prominent Canadian writers Rawi Hage, Joy Kogawa, Dionne Brand, and Kerri Sakamoto. Celebrated local filmmakers Velcro Ripper, Min Sook Lee and Lynne Fernie have also signed the letter.
Kathy Wazana, a Canadian documentary filmmaker and one of the original authors of the letter, also has a great op-ed about the controversy in today’s Toronto Star. In it she both rebuts official criticisms of the film festival protest, and also responds to her own family members who have criticized her action:
I am Jewish, with deep ties to Israel, and to my family members living there. Speaking out against the State of Israel neither diminishes my Jewishness nor puts Israel at risk of destruction.
It calls on Israel to live up to the standard of Jewish ethics that I grew up with. As though this should exonerate Israel, its defenders are always quick to point to the many countries where human rights are routinely violated, leading, inevitably, to the question: "Why are you singling out Israel?"
We do not deny or condone other countries that oppress their populations. Had Beijing or Tehran been selected as the inaugural City to City spotlight, and presented in an uncritical and largely laudatory manner, there would have been equally outraged protests.
TIFF singled out Israel for a celebratory spotlight, and its timing could not have been worse, in view of the ongoing settlement and colonization of Palestinian lands, of the continued construction of the wall that is enclosing the Palestinian population of the West Bank in a series of claustrophobic, prison-like enclaves, of the daily acts of humiliation and violations of the rights and the dignity of old and young alike, and, most recently, of the lethal assault on Gaza that left 1,400 Palestinian women, men and children dead.
The purpose of our letter was to point to a few things that are left out of the glowing descriptions of Tel Aviv as "a young dynamic city that, like Toronto, celebrates diversity." Many people are excluded from that diversity and Tel Aviv, far from being outside the conflict, is the military centre of Israel, a place fighter jets departed from on their lethal missions to Gaza last December and January.
Asserting these facts in no way argues that Israel should not exist or calls for its destruction. This absurd claim is being circulated with the express purpose of discrediting the letter and intimidating its authors into silence.
The accusations seek to divert attention from the issue at hand: the hijacking of Toronto’s premier cultural event and putting it at the service of Israel’s political agenda.
Wazana begins her article by telling a story about receiving a call from her mom asking, "Why are you attacking Israel?". Answering that question in our families, as well as in our communities and society, is one of the greatest accomplishments of any boycott action. Although critics claim that boycotts cut of discussion, the truth is that they are sometimes necessary to force a debate that has been prevented from occurring. The Toronto action has disrupted a status quo which obscures the reality on the ground in Israel/Palestine, and in the process has opened up a conversation which is long overdue.
Ever notice how everything associated with Israel is so militaristic? I know this has been documented before, here and elsewhere. I mean, Wazana’s mother uses the word “attacking.” Her daughter is “attacking” Israel. Geez, you’d think Wazana was dropping bombs from a fighter jet.
Israel is being condemned. As it should be, based on its barbaric, inhumane, and illegal behavior.
Good call on the language.
Now is the perfect time to show full and increasing support for the State and people of Israel. Tel Aviv is agreat Jewish city that should be honored like other Jewish cities of Hebron Jerusalem, and Beit El
The more we build and settle our land, the more Canada ad other states should honor and respect our revivication in our native homeland
Yeah! Right ON, ImTirtzu! Next year, the Toronto Film Festival 2010 will celebrate the newly renamed “Undivided Jerusalem As Our Eternal Capital” in its City-to-City program. And all brand new for the Toronto Film Festival 2011 — a new Country-to-Country program, where Canadians will slavishly reach out to the peace-lovin’ citizens of the newly-formed Judea and Sumaria!
And as the Zionists promised from the beginning, a River of Gold to those who do our bidding . . . and the TIFF will be fully underwritten by Brand Israel through 2020 . . .
RE: “…our native homeland…”
PLEASE SEE: “Israeli Scholar Disputes Founding Myth’, By Morgan Strong, 04/12/09
(EXCERPT) …In ”When and How Was the Jewish People Invented?”, Dr. [Schlomo] Sand, an expert on European history at the University of Tel Aviv, says the Diaspora was largely a myth – that the Jews were never exiled en masse from the Holy Land and that many European Jewish populations converted to the faith centuries later.
Thus, Sand argues, many of today’s Israelis who emigrated from Europe after World War II have little or no genealogical connection to the land. According to Sand’s historical analysis, they are descendents of European converts, principally from the Kingdom of the Khazars in eastern Russia, who embraced Judaism in the Eighth Century, A.D.
The descendants of the Khazars then were driven from their native lands by invasion and conquest and – through migration – created the Jewish populations of Eastern Europe, Sands writes. Similarly, he argues that the Jews of Spain came from the conversion of Berber tribes from northern Africa that later migrated into Europe…
ENTIRE ARTICLE – link to consortiumnews.com
RE: “…our native homeland…”
MY COMMENT: Are you referring to “der Heimatland”? Why don’t you go ahead and use the German like Rudolf Hess and the Nazis did?
FROM WIKIPEDIA: Homeland
(EXCERPT)…In German, homeland is translated as “Heimatland”, and this was a term used by the Nazis to refer to the more common German term “Vaterland” (“Fatherland”). It was also the name of a strongly pro-Nazi magazine edited by Wilhelm Weiss during the rise of the Nazi party in Germany…
…In the apartheid era in South Africa, the concept was given a different meaning. The white government had designated approximately 13% of its territory for black tribal settlement. Whites and other non-blacks were restricted from owning land or settling in those areas. After 1948 they were gradually granted an increasing level of “home-rule”. From 1976 several of these regions were granted independence. Four of them were declared independent nations by South Africa, but were unrecognized as independent countries by any other nation besides each other and South Africa. The territories set aside for the African inhabitants were also known as bantustans…
HOMELAND – link to en.wikipedia.org
____________________________________________________
SEE ALSO: “HOMELAND” IS A NAZI TERM
The origins of this term are discussed at length in this Paul Craig Roberts interview on the Thom Hartmann show.
Program contains an audio clip, taken from a Nazi rally, that is an example of how the term was used (in German).
TO LISTEN TO THE PROGRAM CONTAINING AUDIO CLIP – link to democraticunderground.com
“Had Beijing or Tehran been selected as the inaugural City to City spotlight, and presented in an uncritical and largely laudatory manner, there would have been equally outraged protests.”
What planet are you living on? Beijing hosted the Olympics last year. I’m guessing you weren’t on the front lines protesting.
Interestingly, the NY Times has a story on the front page about the festival. Not a word about any boycott. It tells how this year the festival is a showcase for women directors and I guess implies that we are against women directors if we approve a boycott. clever
It’s Blankfort’s theorem about how there can be no critical disussion of Israel in any mainstream media. You’d think that an international boycott comprised of over 1,000 luminaries would be front page news, at least on the front page of the Arts section. I guarantee you this — as Kath Wazana duly notes — if the TIFF had selected Tehran for its City-to-City program (under Brand Iran?), the resulting boycott would be splashed across the front page of every newspaper in the USA.
Its more progressive to link with Tel Aviv and its network of innovative and dissenting artists, than to boycott Tel Aviv and limit all of our contact and communication to propaganda.
Richard, I respectfully submit to you that the opposite is true. Brand Israel’s unholy coupling with the Toronto Film Festival is — as you call it — a limitation of “contact and communication to propaganda.” The Tel Aviv artists there are talking about anything BUT the situation in Palestine. It’s a whitewashing of the atrocities of Gaza — promoting Israeli films as the product of a progressive, diverse culture. Surely, eve you would have to agree that the primary purpose of Brand Israel is to propagandize . . . No?
Richard, I know you’re unhappy with the prospect of imminent BDS against Israel, but really, the tide is turning. TIFF just may be the kick in the ass that Susan Sarandon, Sean Penn, Bono, Tim Robbins, and other so-called conscientious objectors need to heed the call. Viva Palestina!
The Israeli artists and artists talking about Israel work are talking about a gamut of concerns. It includes the politics, but not just the radical litany.
Have you seen any Palestinian films? They don’t all talk about the occupation.
Many Israeli institutions have been demeaned here, ignorantly to my mind. For example, the Birthright project has been criticized as solely a propaganda indoctrination. My son went on one, and described that in one session, they did discuss the Israeli Palestinian political situation and NOT in unanimously glowing terms about Israel.
I question what I’m told. Don’t you.
Yes, of course. That’s why I’m on Mondoweiss. I used to believe the hype — that the US and Israel were joined at the hip, shared values, let’s bring democracy to the region. My God, Richard — today is 9/11 — wasn’t that the zenith of US-Israel fighting a “common enemy”? “Islamo-facists?”
Over the subsequent years, after I mourned the thousands of patriotic children from our Southern states who lost their lives on the battlefields of Iraq and Afghanistan, did I start to “question what I’m told.” (As you asked.) I read James Bamford’s “Pretext for War” and Frank Rich’s “The Greatest Story Ever Sold” and learned that the entire premise behind the war in Iraq was fictitious and the love child of the neo-cons who George W. Bush permitted to inhabit the “Office of Special Plans.” And yes, I read Walt & Mearshimer, and understood that things were more complicated than they seemed. My elected officials just might not have America’s best interests in mind . . .
Mondoweiss is a unique resource for open dialogue that’s impossible to find on the mainstream media. As I’ve said many times before, I disagree wholeheartedly with your views on I/P, but I respect your contribution to the conversation on this site. I was once on your side . . . but the deaths of 1,400 Palestinians in Operation Cast Lead put you and me on different sides of the table. My children are Jewish, my wife is Jewish and I love and respect the culture. But I abhor radical Zionism.
RE: “My children are Jewish, my wife is Jewish and I love and respect the culture. But I abhor radical Zionism.”
Witty claims to be against the settlements, for example, so why pick on him? Are you saying your children are Jewish in the way Obama claims he’s black and so do his followers? If not, please
explain. Also, so you love and respect the Jewish culture, as distinguished from what other culture?
Citizen, dude, I’m on your side of the issues. I believe there’s a distinction between American Jewry and radical Zionism — I think you agree, right? I’m looking to avoid having Foxy Abe Foxman dismiss my criticism of Israel as anti-Semitic, by giving my bona fides. Yeah, I’m goyim, and I am vehemently against the settlements (and I know you inhabit this site the same way I do, and you abhor the IDF’s activities as much as or even more than I do).
Not sure what you mean that my “children are Jewish in the way Obama claims he’s black and so do his followers?” My kids’ mother is Jewish, I am not, and I depise the way Israel conducts itself among the community of nations. Not sure how that relates to Obama, but happy to respond if you provide further details.
You also asked, “Also, so you love and respect the Jewish culture, as distinguished from what other culture?” Like you, I’m an American. I’m Christian, though not practicing, I retain some of those values. I respect Jewish culture, for all the attributes Phil loves about his heritage, but as an Other, I’m not crazy about the Exceptionalism of the culture. The extremism of Zionists is more frightening to me than “Islamofacism” in part because $3 billion of our taxpayer dollars goes to subsidizing the former and I’m appalled by the catastrophe in Gaza last December.
I always agreed with your posts. What makes you think I’m different in POV than you based on my post to Witty?
Oscar,
I NEVER believed the radical Zionist approach. My disbelief in the conclusion does not prohibit me from appreciating elements and appreciating information.
I’ve advocated consistently among Jews that enough is sufficient, and that a healthy Palestine is a better neighbor than a desparate one.
But, I am NOT a partisan. I reject the approach of “resistance” as both impractical and immoral. There are many ideologies that appeal to adrenaline rushes of certainty that aren’t in fact.
I am a Jew. I am a Zionist. And, I am critical of how Israel is Zionist. But, I am not critical of the right of Israel to be Zionist, to be the site of self-governance of the Jews that choose to be there.
And, I think that Israel’s existence is good for the US, and that it is good for the US to be committed to Israel’s defense, including funding genuine defense.
Richard, I’m getting whipsawed between you and Citizen. Let me clarify. Israel should pull back to 1967 lines. Full stop. If necessary, let’s impose BDS on Israel so Netanyahu gets it (right now, he doesn’t — if you don’t agree with me on this, then we have nothing whatsoever in common). If the IDF continues to ethnically cleanse Palestine, then I believe NATO peacekeeping troops need to be brought in to quell settler violence. I support Israel’s “right to exist” — yes, Lord, indeed I do — but I don’t support it as a “Jewish state,” which I believe is racist and the antithesis to American values.
If you don’t agree with me on that, I respectfully consider you an Israel-firster with different values than me as an American. Not a problem — your choice, my friend — but then I disagree with you on your premise that “it is good for the US to be committed to Israel’s defense, including funding genuine defense.” I believe almost all Americans, if fully informed of the extent of the heinous war crimes of using white phosphorus weapons and DIME-cube bombs against a civilian population, would vehemently rise up against Israel as a rogue nation and agitate against $3 billion in tax dollars being transferred to fund this type of dehumanizing aggression.
If your brand of Zionism = 1967 borders, we can come to an understanding. If not, then your views are a problem to America’s interests abroad. Do you disagree?
I’ve advocated for the 67 borders, with the provision of allowing Jewish settlers that choose to remain in Palestine as Palestinian citizens to do so. Also, there is NO WAY that Israel will give up sovereignty over the Kotel and Jewish portions of the old city.
If all the settlers opted to remain, Palestine could live with a 10% minority, if it were interested in being a democracy and renounce ethnic cleansing.
An alternative to that is the Geneva Accords, which modify the proposed boundaries, by genuine consent.
I get there by a commitment to mutual health, NOT by the path of animosity. My position is OPPOSED to the path of BDS and punitive approaches, instead urging education and methods of persuasion to realize a truly consented peace. (Peace by definition is mutually consented.)
The choice to adopt punitive approach, IS a choice to reject the humanity of the other, a choice to reject reform. It rejects the recognition that individuals may in fact be persuaded, and that their rational objections should be considered.
The skill-less resisters (skilled only in tactic of resistance, but not of institution building or of peace by the above definition) harm universally. They are fair in that regard. They harm by deterring reconciliation and improvement to the lives of all concerned, even as they imagine that their adrenaline discipline is helpful.
If they slowed down, and JUST looked at what they could do to be of help, they’d choose to help, rather than only object.
Just to clarify, I dislike Netanyahu’s and colleagues’ politics in multiple respects.
And, I think the appropriate response is to criticize and educate. The only agitation that I would consider supporting is directly related to settlement expansion, which I think Obama is the most critical voice, and support for his insistence on real cessation of settlement expansion, is the best.
I don’t believe in BDS, at all. Like Hamas shelling in December, contributed to the election of Netanyahu, BDS will keep him in office.
Richard, c’mon, let’s be intellectually honest. How long would Netanyahu last in office if America had the cojones to pull the $3 billion in taxpayer-funded support of the IDF, blaming the suspension on Bibi’s intrasigence on the settlements? He would be toast.
BDS works — it did in South Africa and it would with Israel as well. I look forward to debating you further on the pages of Mondoweiss, and I’ll debate Professor Alan Dershowitz any time, any where on the same topic.
“If they slowed down, and JUST looked at what they could do to be of help, they’d choose to help, rather than only object.”
I’m curious. What do you think I could do to be of help?
BDS worked relative to South Africa.
It won’t work relative to Israel.
Netanyahu’s argument to Israelis is that the world is against us. BDS confirms that argument.
Your point about specifying conditions for BDS is important, one that is lost on the majority of dissenters, especially the most militant.
‘It calls on Israel to live up to the standard of Jewish ethics that I grew up with. As though this should exonerate Israel, its defenders are always quick to point to the many countries where human rights are routinely violated, leading, inevitably, to the question: “Why are you singling out Israel?”‘
a standard tactic..and an admission of guilt. But as for the ‘jewish ethics’ where were christian ethics in nazi germany or south africa? Power elites rarely are ethical.