pageok
pageok
pageok
Bleg for Information on International Women's Peace Service:

The International Women's Peace Service supplies anti-Israel speakers to schools and churhces around the United States. It is led by a Jewish woman from San Francisco named Kate Raphael. According to FrontPage magazine, Raphael is a leader of the International Solidarity Movement. She is the subject of a very brief profile from Discover The Networks. The IWPS and Raphael are also the subject of an enormous amount of positive attention from various IndyMedia websites around the world.

Raphael was expelled from Israel for her role in a demonstration organized by ISM. She claims that the demonstration was peaceful, and others claim that it was not.

I would be grateful if commenters could supply additional information about the IWPS and Raphael. Please do not argue the merits of the pro/anti-Israel issue. Please do supply information about the veracity of IWPS/Raphael, and whether IWPS/Raphael's self-description as "peace activists" is accurate.

Defending the Indefensible:
Not a primary source of course, but a good starting point:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kate_Raphael_Bender
2.12.2006 4:39pm
Charles Chapman (mail) (www):
Interesting. As a Jewish woman, I would think that she had a right to citizenship in Israel under the right to return. Can Israel expel citizens? Even for "violent protest or, to take the worse case scenario, treason, etc.? Or was it the case that she didn't exercise her right to Israeli citizenship?
2.12.2006 4:56pm
MDJD2B (mail):
Interesting. As a Jewish woman, I would think that she had a right to citizenship in Israel under the right to return. Can Israel expel citizens? Even for "violent protest or, to take the worse case scenario, treason, etc.? Or was it the case that she didn't exercise her right to Israeli citizenship?

Eligibility for citizenship does not equate to citizenship. If she did not claim citizenship based on the Law of Return she was not a citizen.

(Sorry, Prof. Kopel; I know this does not address your query)
2.12.2006 5:53pm
Glenn Bridgman (mail):
I dodn't have any information on Raphael, but did you just reference Discover the Network in a nonparodic fashion? Because, come now, lets maintain at least the semblance of credibility.
2.12.2006 6:45pm
Lee25 (mail):
I don't know anything about her specifically, but there are nonviolent protests against the "wall" or "separation barrier" all the time. I know the PSM movement gets a bad rap here because of divestment, but they do a great job of encouraging nonviolent resistance to Israel among the Palestinians. There is a regular stream of peace activists that go to Israel, organize or participate in nonviolent protests and then get expelled.
2.12.2006 8:13pm
Milhouse (www):
Those protests are hardly nonviolent. Soldiers get injured regularly by these nonviolent "protestors". Beside which, their purpose is to hinder the building of the fence, so as to allow terrorists through to kill people. That's hardly peaceful or nonviolent, even if they never lifted a hand against a soldier themselves.
2.12.2006 9:53pm
Ben Regenspan (mail) (www):
Those protests are hardly nonviolent. Soldiers get injured regularly by these nonviolent "protestors".

I'm not familiar with this phenomenon. Source?
And it would be nice if you addressed the question regarding the International Women's Peace Service specifically, since that seems to be, after all, the point of this bleg.
2.13.2006 12:46am
David M. Nieporent (www):
I know the PSM movement gets a bad rap here because of divestment, but they do a great job of encouraging nonviolent resistance to Israel among the Palestinians.
PSM doesn't get a bad rap "because of divestment." PSM gets a bad rap because it endorses Palestinian terrorism ("resistance"). PSM members themselves may or may not engage in violence, but they are in no way a part of any nonviolence movement.

And yes, I know this isn't responsive to the bleg, but I don't have any information for that.
2.13.2006 3:39am
Charles Chapman (mail) (www):
Beside which, their purpose is to hinder the building of the fence, so as to allow terrorists through to kill people. That's hardly peaceful or nonviolent, even if they never lifted a hand against a soldier themselves.
Fascinating. Assume I'm a Palestinian. I own land with a home and farm on it. It has been owned by my family, free and clear, for generations. Neither I nor any member of my family supports terrorism. Neither I nor any member of my family has attacked an Isaeli. We simply want to be left alone. Israel informs me that it is going to take my land and knock down my home so that it can put up a security wall so its citizens can be safe. I peacefully protest the taking of my land. I don't harm or attack an Israeli.

And I'm somehow being violent even though I "don't lift a hand against a soldier."

And the people who force me off of my land at gunpoint? The people who use a bulldozer to knock down my home? The people who have the raw power to do such a thing despite the fact that I can't vote for or against them? Yes, they're the nonviolent ones.
2.13.2006 3:43am
Been There, Done That:
Chapman,

Under your logic, the takings in Kelo are violent.

It is astonishing that the myth of the happy-go-lucky peaceful palestinian farmer, harrassed by those nasty israelis, can seriously be evoked in light of terrorist massacres. Actually, quite sick.
2.13.2006 10:27am
Veritas:
It's also a myth that most of the Arabs have been living on the lands in the West Bank for generations; see Joan Peters' book "From Time Immemorial". There was MASSIVE Arab migration to the area when more Jews started settling the land in the late 19th and early 20th Centuries. But that fact is way too inconvenient for the Arabs and the Left.
2.13.2006 1:30pm
luagha:
Charles Chapman's hypothetical is inaccurate as well. Approximately ten wealthy arab families (extended families) could be said to own land in the manner he describes - free and clear for generations. They generally did not live in the area, preferring to collect rent from tenant farmers and the like. The original Jewish settlers in the area would purchase or rent from the same families.
If only what he describes actually existed, many matters would be different.
2.13.2006 1:39pm
Andrew J. Lazarus (mail):
I hate to participating in hijacking the thread, but From Time Immemorial used the same factcheckers as The Protocols of the Elders of Zion, for the opposite purpose. One of the most detailed refutations appeared here (each part is a separate link). Basically, the book's target audience is ignorant Diaspora Jews looking for magic-bullet talking points. I wouldn't put it quite so strongly except for Veritas' supercilious tone.
2.14.2006 9:46am
matt (mail):
luagha I'd like to see your source, I'll just say that my grandparents stayed with a palestinian family that had their olive orchard bulldozed for the wall, but they were probably terrorists, collective guilt and all.
2.14.2006 1:26pm