“Most Viewed Writers” on the topic “Palestinians” in Quora are almost exclusively Zionist and rabidly anti-Palestinian
Update: 7/24/2019: Fighting Against Quora’s censorship of Palestinian voices: an interview with Dr Rima Najjar By Ramona Wadi |
“Zionist propaganda on Quora is rampant…” — Dr. Rima Najjar
‘“Internet users” are refusing to accept the same momentum of alienation that has been reached in the diplomatic arena. Despite being made “to feel uncomfortable,” people speaking for Palestine are fighting back.’ [Also published here: https://medium.com/@rimanajjar/fighting-against-quoras-censorship-of-palestinian-voices-an-interview-with-dr-rima-najjar-4334a7f1634a]
Update: 6/20/2019: Jews for Palestinian Right of Return posted a petition
on Change.org directed at Quora Support and Karen Kramer, Quora General Counsel: Tell Quora: Stop Banning Palestinian Voices — Reinstate Dr. Rima Najjar Now! This issue goes beyond Quora and addresses the important subject that political opinion should be protected on social media organizations posing as public platforms. We must all fight this battle as it has tremendous potential for educating people and getting social media companies like Quora to listen.
Updates: 6/16/2019: Quora must join the Consortium, Partnership on Artificial Intelligence to Benefit People and Society
6/15/2019: Update on Rima Najjar’s Case against Quora’s Censorship of Palestine Speech
Update: 6/11/2019: Suppression of Palestinian Voices on Social Media Is Nothing New
Update (6/6/2019): Benay Blend, writing on Mondoweiss about my Quora case: “Other Jewish writers and readers on Quora felt they could more easily bring me back into the fold, whereas many, especially Israeli Jews, who are strongly represented there, consider Palestinians as Other, never to be admitted into chosen ranks. At one point, one of the administrators for a Space called “Strength in Unity,” a space devoted to Palestinian/Jewish dialogue (and really one of the clearest examples of “normalization” I have ever come across), tried to convince me that our Jewish rituals are all linked to Israeli landscapes, so it would be good for me to switch my love of the New Mexican desert, where I live, over to my “homeland” which she felt should be Israel. When that didn’t work, I’m pretty sure she reported me as violating the Be Nice, Be Respectful policy.”
Update (6/3/2019): Palestinian academic sues Quora claiming she was banned from the website for criticizing Zionism
Update (5/5/2019): Banned from Quora “because they are pro-Palestine”
Update (5/2/2019): I hope this journal entry regarding Quora administrative practices will serve as a useful resource for people interested in researching how closed social media platforms or environments use rules of civility to contain Palestine speech within certain ideological boundaries and, at the same time, serve as a hasbara venue to post outright disinformation in a question/answer format that easily and quickly surfaces on google searches about Israel/Palestine topics.
This morning, I received a letter from Tatiana Estevez, Writer Relations, topwriters@quora.com, informing me that my appeal to lift my ban on Quora has not been accepted. This Writers Relations administrator did not once bother to comment on or throw light on my many queries on a Quora blog called Collapse Detectives, even when I contacted her directly. She had no “relations” with me, despite the fact that I was clearly being harassed as a writer for my political views and seeking relief by trying to understand how the rules work. Now, when we finally communicate, she throws the book at me, without one acknowledgment of the hundreds of well-informed posts I have written on Quora on a variety of topics.
And here is what stands out to me from her letter, as I posted on Facebook:
Catch 22 on Quora
“If you write a lot of content that is anti-Zionist and then call out people for being Zionists, then you’re using this term in pejorative way with the intent to derogatorily label that person.
… The two emails you have sent have not given me confidence that you take responsibility for this issue and that you can or are prepared to change how you engage Quora.”- Tatiana Estevez, Writer Relations
topwriters@quora.com
Read my letter to Estevez as a blog post: Dear Quora: Letter to Tatiana Esteves, Writer Relations, Quora
Update (5/3/2019): Read Writing on Quora while Palestinian, which documents blog posts about Quora practices on Collapse Detectives,
and
On the Hijacking of “Palestine Today”: The Drive for “Normalization” on Quora
Why are TruthFinder and Malwarebytes sponsoring Israeli Propaganda on Quora?
Censorship on Quora: A Palestine Case Study
Feedback for Quora Policymakers
Jewish Supremacy In Palestine Is A Dirty Reality; It Is Not “Uncivil” To Point It Out
Palestine, the place where Israel is
_____________________
Quora has a feature that allows members to see stats on “most viewed writers”. When a writer breaks the cut-off number of views in a certain topic, he or she is sent a notification. Recently, Benay Blend, a writer on Quora with a Ph.D. in history (who has been banned, along with me), received a notification that said, “You are now a Most Viewed Writer in Palestinians.” She shared with me the link to the list of “most viewed writers”, which showed the following names, six of whom are professed Zionists:
When I saw the list, I was taken aback and I wondered, as Benay Blend did in an answer to a question I asked, ‘What picture about Palestinians emerges on Quora from the mostly Zionist writers who dominate the list of “Most Viewed Writers in Palestinians”?’:
My first thought looking at this list: Where are the Palestinians? Except for Rima Najjar, described on Israel Currents as “(one of) the most militant Palestinians on Quora,” and Sana Khoury, who professes her Palestinianhood at every turn, but adopts and promulgates Zionist beliefs, they do not exist. It could be that the spectacle we have witnessed on Quora of what could happen to a strong Palestinian voice (malicious reporting and ad hominem attacks, BNBR rules notwithstanding) that deters. Or perhaps there simply aren’t that many English-speaking Palestinians on Quora. Whatever the reason, it’s a pity. And more so, because it opens up the space for their enemies to take over.
Although it is generally known that Quora is and has been for a long time inundated by hasbara and Israel-branding content, this piece of evidence was appalling to see.
Blend goes on to say (the following is most of her answer, now deleted):
As Ella Shohat writes, an important element of colonialism is the “distortion and even the denial of the history of the colonized”.
For the majority of writers here, Palestine does not exist. Indeed, according to Jim Braiden, there is “no such place.” In an article in Mondoweiss, Liz Rose relates that the only way that Zionism can equate with human rights is to negate Palestinian history.When Palestinian sources, including the Electronic Intifada, are used to prove a point, such as the existence of apartheid in Israel, such sources are typically deemed not credible. For example, Michael Davison falsely describes Ali Abunimah’s carefully documented posts as “at best, distortions of truth, at worst, downright fabrications.” For him, Zionism could not be oppressive, but instead is a vibrant movement, so it does not enter his framework to consider Palestinians have suffered as a direct result of such thinking.
In order to write from a Palestinian perspective, it is necessary to undo Zionism, which is very difficult for a Zionist to do. That is why to have them dominate the air spaces is so disturbing to see.
Comments such as the following are rarely challenged. In answer to a question about proportionality, again Michael Davison, the top-listed writer, replies:
“This question shows the ignorance of the questioner. Comparing body counts to try to justify a conflict is perhaps the stupidest comparison to make. All it does is show which party to the conflict is less efficient, less capable and less able to actually affect the conflict (in this case, Hamas).When a grasshopper attacks a lawnmower, you might want to applaud his courage, but you have to deplore his stupidity at the same time.”
Edward Said in his 1979 essay “Zionism from the Standpoint of its Victims” writes:
“Very little is said about what Zionism entailed for non-Jews who happened to have encountered it…To the Palestinian, for whom Zionism was somebody else’s idea imported into Palestine and for which in a very concrete way he or she was made to pay and suffer, these forgotten things about Zionism are the very things that are centrally important.”
Remarkably, Said then goes on to attempt an understanding of what Israel meant to Jews: “I can understand the intertwined terror and the exultation out of which Zionism has been nourished, and I think I can at least grasp the meaning of Israel for Jews.”
That effort towards empathy — an attempt to understand the Palestinian consciousness — is what continues to be absent from Zionist discourse. For the most part, criticism of Zionism has been so smeared with the charge of anti-Semitism, that there is no chance at all for the dialogue that so many on Quora seem to want. For example, in answer to a question asking if anti-Zionism is a form of antisemitism, the answers from Zionists were overwhelmingly yes.
From Dani Ishai Behan:
It is invariably a form of antisemitism. The only exception to the rule would be anarchists who oppose all nation-states equally.
But I don’t think I’ve ever met an anti-Zionist who landed in that category, so it’s neither here nor there.
From Elke Weiss:
I don’t think it’s possible to be an anti-Zionist without engaging in anti-semitic behavior, outside a complete opposition to all forms of nationalism.
From Mark L. Levinson:
Is antizionism often a form of antisemitism? Easiest question on Quora. You can argue indefinitely over whether anti-Zionism is always a form of anti-Semitism, but anyone can see that it’s often a form of anti-Semitism. (Those who say “How can it be anti-Semitism when it’s not against Arabs?” are the worst.)
In contrast, see Rima Najjar’s answer to Is Zionism an openly racist ideology?
To conclude with a final quote from Said:
“…The concealment by Zionism of its own history has by now therefore become institutionalized, and not only in Israel. To bring out its history as in a sense it was exacted from Palestine and the Palestinians, these victims on whose suppression Zionism and Israel have depended, is thus a specific intellectual/political task in the present context of discussion about a ‘comprehensive peace’ in the Middle East.”
Ultimately, I think that Zionists on Quora and elsewhere have to be willing to embrace the Palestinian community that they are writing about, and listen to what they have to say. …
__________
In my own answer to the question ‘What picture about Palestinians emerges on Quora from the mostly Zionist writers who dominate the list of “Most Viewed Writers in Palestinians”?’, I analyze the type of insidious misinformation such writers on Quora contribute — in this case, the topic is tourism in Palestine:
I just came across an example of writing about Palestine by a Zionist on the list, and it has made me mad. Someone had asked me to write about tourist sites in Palestine, so I went to see if there was a question on Quora already with a good answer. I found one with two answers. The top answer [Elke Weiss’s answer to What are some must-see places in Palestine for tourists?], written by “Most Viewed Writer in Palestinians” Elke Weiss, mentions a few links with very little information about them. And then she adds cursorily, “I’d also suggest Bethlehem and Ramallah and Jericho.”
But a cursory answer is not the problem.
If the reader bothers to click on the Wikipedia links she provides, he or she will get the impression that the particular sites mentioned have little to do (or only secondarily so) with Muslim heritage. The inhabitants of Palestine are predominantly Muslim, but the heritage represented in the links, regardless of which religion finds significance in these sites, belongs to all Palestinians, the native people of the land. Elke Weiss wants the reader to think otherwise, as her concluding sentence clearly indicates: “Please be safe. It’s a contested area.” If “the area” is “contested”, then so are the sites she mentions.
Additionally, “Palestine”, according to this writer, is not “occupied territory” or “the West Bank and Gaza Strip”; it is “an area” or “an Authority”. Here is how she begins her answer: “In the Palestinian authority, I heartily suggest.”
By the way, the Palestinian National Authority (PNA), for those who don’t know, was established as a five-year interim body to see over Palestinian affairs in the occupied territories (the West Bank and Gaza Strip). That was back in 1994. The term “Palestine” in the question is used by the PNA to refer to the West Bank and the Gaza Strip, as in, for example, Mission of Palestine in Denmark.
But back to the subject at hand. Following is the full text of the other uncollapsed answer to this question on Quora. I will leave it to speak for itself. [Remember the question is about tourism in Palestine!]
“Ilana Halupovich’s answer to What are some must-see places in Palestine for tourists?
Ilana Halupovich, London, Barcelona, Paris, Amsterdam and some USA & Canada
You mean Judea & Samaria? You can use this book Catch the Jew! as a guide. Tuvia came to Israel, walked everywhere and wrote down his impressions. If you are non-Muslim, his warnings are important.In Gaza you should see the Gaza-city and the Tunnels of Gaza. Warning: You are more likely to leave alive those tunnels that lead to Israel, than those that lead to Egypt. Unless you are a kid or short — in this case you don’t have much chance of leaving at all. Hamas Killed 160 Palestinian Children to Build Gaza Tunnels {.}”
For the year (2015) when these two answers were written, here are some “selected indicators in Palestine” for tourism — just for fun.
____________
The most troubling thing to me on Quora is that the “politeness” rules are themselves politicized. As an example, terminology about Palestine/Israel is challenged and questions are flagged when word usage describing the struggle comes from the Palestinian “narrative” as it is called on Quora. For a while there the word “Palestine” was unacceptable in a question because it made Israelis uncomfortable. I blogged about that incident in ‘Palestine, the place where Israel is’.
More recently, I had the following revealing exchange on a post I submitted to Collapse Detectives in which I wondered why the wording of the question ‘What are the population statistics of Palestinians living in Israel, the West Bank, Gaza and in the diaspora/exile?’ was flagged as “not neutral”:
Jennifer Edeburn (designated “Top Writer” on Quora. I believe Top Writers, as a group, make decisions about bans on Quora; the process is not transparent.)
I believe that if you rephrase the question you cite to replace the words diaspora/exile with “other countries” or some such, the marking will be removed. The idea that all Palestinians who do not live in Palestine are in exile is the “non-neutral” perspective that supported the flagging of this question.
Thanks, Jennifer Edeburn , but I don’t agree with your analysis. All Palestinians who do not live in Palestine are “in exile”, a term accepted in Palestinian discourse the same way Jewish discourse accepts the term “diaspora” (to Palestinians, that’s far from neutral). It refers to the fact that Palestinians living in other countries are denied return to Palestine, whether they wish to return or not. See Edward Said’s book Reflections on Exile and Other essays.
Apr 18 ·
Rima Najjar I’m not saying the term is incorrect, I’m saying that a moderator not familiar with the usage of the term would take that viewpoint and, assuming that is why it was reported, that is why the marking was applied.
I hear what you are saying about the accepted usage of the term in Palestinian discourse. But to the less familiar, it looks non-neutral. Which do you want more, to use the term that speaks to your soul, or to have your words be heard? If the latter, you should change it to be less easily misunderstood by those who do not share your knowledge and background. After all, I am not suggesting that you use an incorrect term, only a different one.
And, if you want to report questions that use the Jewish term diaspora as being similarly insincere, go right ahead. I don’t know whether or not those reports will be successful, but they will be just as justified.
Apr 18 · 2 upvotes including Jennifer Edeburn
You are right, Jennifer — “a moderator not familiar with the usage of the term would take that viewpoint.” I agree. But don’t you think it is better to introduce the usage into common discourse — i.e., try to educate the moderator by appealing, etc., so that reports flagging Palestinian terms will not be successful any more?
Rima I agree that if the term is accepted as common discourse then any issue will be resolved. But I think you have the directionality wrong. Moderators are mirrors of common discourse, not mediators of it.
_________________
On a Quora Space called Palestine Today, Rebecca Sealfon, a Zionist, posted the following question, calling diaspora Palestinians … “expats”!
Incidentally, this Zionist is now named an administrator on the Quora Space Palestine Today and has posted:
Action Item #1: Recruit the best Quorans to post on the Space.
Rebecca Sealfon, Principal Data Science Instructor at Byte Academy (2019-present)
Admin · Posted Sun
If the best Quorans can continue to post here, we will be in a strong position for what I suggest as the next action item, recruiting the best people involved in the issue from outside Quora.
A great discussion of the best Quorans is at Who is your favorite Quoran who writes about Middle Eastern topics? In particular, I consider Sara Manar, a new writer who is now a Contributor here, to have written a standout answer to this question. Based on Sara Manar’s answer to Who is your favorite Quoran who writes about Middle Eastern topics? I have discovered and am recruiting Dani Ishai Behan.
Dani had several questions about the code of conduct for this Space. I considered them to be bar-raising, and answered them to his satisfaction. Please let me know if you agree with the following:
No challenges to cultures’ or ethnic groups’ stated claims of indigeneity to the region. This seems to be everyone’s favorite way to try and discredit the other, and it always boomerangs back against them. You can’t really fight cultural mythology with opposing cultural mythology when you’re dealing with such strong cultures. I consider this point covered by Ahmad El-Sheikh’s “Stop denying the other side’s existence,” “Stop denying the fact that Israelis/Palestinians each have a distinct culture,” and “Stop denying the other side’s right to live on the land.” However, Dani asked specifically about indigeneity, so I am making this into a point.
No dividing people based on whether they are “white” or “nonwhite.” This is the position Malcolm X held after he saw Muslims of what Americans would consider many races in brotherhood on the Hajj. From the Hajj, Malcolm X realized this distinction was actually an irrelevant foreign imposition when he tried to use it to view the Middle East. If you want to learn more about how he came to this view from the opposite side, I recommend reading The Autobiography of Malcolm X: As Told to Alex Haley. Having said this, I would be open to Jews who wish to self-identify as Arab-like, or vice versa. I believe Jews and Arabs continue to recognize their shared roots and influence one another, as they have throughout the history of their contact.
No deliberate falsification of current situations or history. This is partly covered by Ahmad’s “Stop dismissing facts as propaganda,” but Dani asked specifically for this.
What do you think? Any other suggestions for who to recruit, and for what types of posts?
_________________
And in a conversation with Benay Blend on a Quora blog called Insurgency, Jennifer Edeburn clarifies her position while the two were discussing the issue of reports/collapsed answers that led to one of my previous bans (my account is currently banned):
Jennifer Edeburn
Mar 15
I am also Jewish, but not Zionist. And I agree that sometimes some messages are more acceptable than others. But you note that I referenced the Overton window. My point is that it is not Quora that is defining that speech as being more or less acceptable than others, but society as a whole right now. That is why it is acceptable to speak of the Holocaust as ethnic cleansing, but not to use those words in the context of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. Everyone knows that history is written by the winners. What will people say in 2000 years? We can’t know. But it’s possible, now, to express disagreement with Israel’s policies — even on Quora — in such a way that those views are heard. Other people do it.
As for other anti-Semitic, racist, and sexist answers that do not get collapsed — yes. Quora relies heavily on reporting, and that means that enforcement of policy will be uneven. Even when answers are reported, it is extremely difficult to maintain a particular standard of action. I’m not excusing moderation, I think they have a lot of work to do. But two wrongs have never made a right; to point at failures elsewhere does not make every moderation decision that you disagree with an incorrect one.
I know that it might not sound that way, but I am truly trying to be helpful. If Rima wants to write and wants her answers to stay up, those answers must be written from the desire to help the reader understand, and not a desire to portray a certain message. They must be written using language that is as neutral as possible. If she wants to call something ethnic cleansing and expect it to stay up, then she had better find a definition of ethnic cleansing from a reputable source and show uncontestably how those actions fit the definition. To make a strong negative statement, especially against a group, it must either be the generally accepted position or it must be carefully and completely supported. Otherwise, it is a BNBR violation.
Benay Blend
Mar 15 · 1 upvote
Jennifer, you say, "If Rima wants to write and wants her answers to stay up, those answers must be written from the desire to help the reader understand, and not a desire to portray a certain message." It's not clear to me why one should cancel the other! Her particular message as a Palestinian is designed, precisely, to help the reader (who you must agree is inundated with the Israeli "narrative") understand the Palestinian reality and situation. That you or any other reader "disputes" the message, doesn't make it either untrue or unhelpful. And, Rima's answers, if you look at her body of work on Quora, is scrupulously substantiated. She has quoted from Ilan Pappe's book on the ethnic cleansing of Palestinians many times, as well as other historians (there is absolutely no historical question about that). Same with the crime of apartheid - she always refers to its definition “on the basis of scholarly inquiry and overwhelming evidence” and links to the source.
Jennifer Edeburn
Mar 15 · 2 upvotes
I agree that helping the reader understand and desiring to portray a certain message are not necessarily mutually exclusive. But I think Rima’s answers are often reported because they may appear to be more motivated by the message. I am not saying that that is why she writes them. But intent and impact are different things, and it’s the impact that counts here.
You are correct that she scrupulously includes references in her answers. But when using terms that are understood by the lay reader differently than those who are ‘in the thick of it’, linking to an outside reference is not enough. As an example, let’s look again at that phrase ‘ethnic cleansing’. The true definition of that term is to remove individuals from a territory based on their ethnicity by either relocating or killing them. BUT, the lay reader most likely knows and interprets that term in the context of removing those individuals only by killing them as was done in the Holocaust and other ethnic genocides, and not in the context of that more complete definition. They are not going to follow a link to find the error in their understanding, especially when content that immediately follows draws a similarity to the Holocaust, they are going to hit the report button because they are confident they understand what has been written. Add on the fact that that perspective is a contested historical position — as is the opposite portrayal that the Palestinians left voluntarily — and even those who might interpret the term correctly may be unimpressed by the lack of acknowledgment that there are other narratives.
Whether or not I dispute Rima’s message is irrelevant. I have not said that she should express a different viewpoint, only that she should express her views in a different way. I have tried to make my criticisms as constructive as possible, and you can take my advice or leave it. But if she continues to write answers in her current style, I expect that she will continue to experience the same result. And as to your question in the title of this post — I’ll not speak for the readership of this blog as to whether or not they agree with the collapse of these answers, but I can tell you from experience that no, there is very little that can be done except for Rima to change her writing style. If she makes Top Writer, then she may gain a more direct ear for some questions. Maybe. But even that is no kind of guarantee.
Benay Blend
Mar 15 ·
Jennifer, I agree it’s the impact that counts here. I have two questions: Who defines the impact? I think we both could agree that we don't want the trolls and malicious reports to define the impact. Rima's answers get upvotes and many views from people who find the impact of her writing helpful and positive. Why shouldn't this group be defining the impact? My second question is, when we talk about the impact of a question on people in this situation, we surely must factor Palestinian, other Arab and pro-Palestine advocates around the world. I understand Quora is expanding to include translation in several languages. If Rima's answers are translated into Arabic (I believe she has allowed translation of her answers), then we should consider the impact on these people, which would be positive. Also, Jennifer, I honestly can't agree with the example you give about "ethnic cleansing". This phrase represents a central historic catastrophe that has befallen the Palestinian people. It does not need a paragraph of explanation each time it is mentioned, unless the question is directly about ethnic cleansing. But everything that is happening today politically on the Israeli/Palestinian conflict is the result of this one tragic and crucial event. Rima refers to it as context to understanding what is happening today, whether in the occupied Palestinian territory or on the Gaza Strip or inside Israel behind the Green Line. The lay person, unless that person is a troll, is provided an opportunity to learn something. That lay person is not only an Israeli Jew; he or she could be anybody who wants to gain an understanding of the conflict from a Palestinian perspective.
Benay Blend
Mar 15
Jennifer, I must take issue with some of the things you say here, which I don't agree with. You begin by characterizing the answers as "accusing Israelis of ethnic cleansing". That is far from accurate. None of the answers are accusing Israeli Jews of committing the crime of ethnic cleansing (I take it by Israelis, you mean Israeli Jews). The ethnic cleansing of three quarters of the Arab population of Mandate Palestine took place in 1948. The answers do explain this historical context directly and indirectly. If Israeli Jews receive it as inflammatory speech, that is not the problem of the answer. It is not a violation of BNBR for a Palestinian writer to express accurately and without subterfuge their reality, nor should Quora or anyone else impose an "acceptable" framework on their speech, especially as they are speaking from the vantage view of an oppressed people.
Benay Blend
Mar 15 ·
All of the information was well-researched, and even if they express a point of view, which we all do, that is not against policy. We are all biased. We all have an opinion.
Kat Rectenwald
Mar 16
I have read some of Rima’s answers, I agree with Jenni and in the unlikely case that moderation was wrong with the edit block (or even biased): I can perfectly live with that. I take pro-Israel bias anytime over the opposite, because, like you said: integrity.
Also: political urgency? I don’t think so.
My solidarity with the people of Gaza expands to exactly one point: yes, they’re shouldn’t be new settlements.
That’s what my conscience tells me, and that’s about it.
Benay Blend
Mar 16 ·
Well, Kat, you are perfectly entitled to your opinion, as is Jennifer. Still, it is an opinion and has nothing to do with BNBR policy and the issue I am raising - what amounts to censorship of Palestinians voices about the topic. Please read Rima's answer to this question: Do answers critical of Israel necessarily violate the Be Polite, Be Respectful (BNBR) policy on Quora?
Zionist, or pro-Israel writers, on Quora churn out masses of disinformation on Palestine, and, as Cliff Jones says, “They are also very often ignorant about both recent and ancient history and choose a totally wrong-headed interpretation of the word Semitic.”
Additionally, they game the system by voting down, collapsing and obscuring information critical of Israel and upvote poor answers that don’t deserve to be on top. I wrote about this in the following collapsed answer:
Rima Najjar, retired professor, Al-Quds University, Palestine
What can Quora Management do to end malicious reporting that censors speech on Palestine/Israel?
First of all, Quora Management needs to understand that what often happens in this regard and is consistently experienced by some users does in fact amount to censorship as well as harassment. For serious writers who put in a great deal of effort answering questions and providing information on the topic, Quora Management can take a serious look at those accounts and help stop the harassment the writers feel as a result of repeated collapses and even deletions, that do get eventually restored but that take a psychological toll.
For a long time now, I have been struggling with what I am now convinced is censorship of pro-Palestine/anti-Zionist speech on Quora instigated by organized trolling at the first tier of Quora Moderation.
Most of my efforts so far have been confined to trying to understand how Quora works — first, making sure to know what Quora policies/rules are and scrupulously follow them, and then trying to understand who is behind the frequent collapse of my well-researched, informative answers about Palestine/Israel, and to avoid appealing through the link by the collapsed answer, because the moderators there appeared to me to be biased against Palestine speech. In fact, when I started writing on Quora, I had a long discussion once on Collapse Detectives regarding the use of the word “Palestine” itself in questions, and how the flagged question edit changed “Palestine” to “where Israel is now”.
Now things have opened up much more, and I am very grateful for that. But my answers, into which I put a great deal of effort hoping they would be useful, not only to Quora readers but also on the internet generally to people searching for answers on the topics I write about — Israel, Zionism, Palestine, Palestine-Israeli conflict — continue to be collapsed on a regular basis or stalled by bots as a result of malicious reporting. When I appeal, my answers are restored, but nothing is done by Management to stop such a misuse and gaming of the Quora system.
My reporting to Censorship Online has worked with my Facebook account. I am no longer harassed by malicious reporting there in the way I continue to be on Quora. Facebook took a good close look at my account as a result of the report there and did something (I am not sure what) to help.
Following is feedback I sent to Quora not long ago through the “General Feedback” window on Quora Help:
I would very much appreciate hearing what others suggest as a remedy to this problem. My voice on Quora is not suppressed, as is evidenced by the fact that Quora Moderation at some level of management restores my answers and overturns my edit blocks. I am talking about the consistent harassment engendered by the malicious reporting on this political issue that Management does not seem to be able to address at the first tier of moderation.
_________________
Do answers critical of Israel necessarily violate the Be Polite, Be Respectful (BNBR) policy on Quora? [My answer below is deleted]
Rima Najjar, retired professor, Al-Quds University, Palestine
I believe the application of the BNBR policy when it comes to speech regarding Israel is confusing on Quora. Part of the reason for the confusion is that Quora Moderation is not transparent in its application of the policy. Often people whose answers are collapsed have no idea exactly why they are considered in violation. Quora Moderation refers them to the policy guidelines. That’s been frustrating in my experience, as I value being able to contribute answers in my area of specialty, Palestine/Israel, but I find that the lack of transparency holds me back from contributing as fully as I would like.
I agree with Quora rules and very much intend to follow them, but the problem is their misapplication in some cases. I have had many a collapsed answer overturned on appeal. In the absence of clarity from User Operations, I have resorted to help blogs on Quora such as Collapse Detectives, where other Quorans try to guess what the violation might be and their feedback allows us to correct violations.
In answers related to Israel written from a point of view sympathetic with the Palestinian struggle for justice, there is little clarity. Quora BNBR Policy guidelines are meant, commendably, to eliminate hate speech and bigotry from the forum by addressing “civility, respect and consideration” in discourse; they are not meant to censor information or political speech directed at systems of government around the world.
Regarding Israel, I completely avoid personal discussions with other Quorans on political issues, as these tend to get out of hand quickly. But writing well-considered answers to questions about Israel and Palestine is a different matter. The inappropriate application of BNBR policy arises, in my view, because people who disagree with the political views of the writer make false claims that Moderation sometimes accepts conflating criticism of Israel’s policies and practices, as they relate to the Palestinian people, with criticism of Judaism or of Jews in general.
Take, for example, an answer by Shelley Sherman Dube to the following question: What are the reasons why the U.S. gives billions of dollars to Israel in military aid? Is this aid controversial?. Dube begins his answer by falsely characterizing my own factual, even-handed and well-sourced answer as:
https://www.quora.com/What-are-t...
The writer of an article pretending to answer this question, Rima Najar is constantly spreading lies about the Jews, claiming they control the wold, lies on par with the book Mein Kampf by Adolph Hitler. Her answer overflows with inaccurate information, libel, and slander.
Of course, I say no such thing — judge for yourself. I have had a previous answer on the same topic collapsed as a violation of the BNBR policy. I posted about that Moderation decision on Collapse Detectives here. My guess is that the confusion regarding some Moderation decisions applied to answers about Israel may be influenced by inaccurate statements such as the one above that Dube includes in his answer.
I agree with the following comment made by Benay Blend, which addresses an important consideration about the dissemination of information and knowledge on social media regarding Palestine/Israel.
https://www.quora.com/Do-answers...
… Judging from answers that I see here on Quora and from comments on Twitter and Facebook there is a general lack of critical thinking not to mention knowledge about a wide variety of areas. That is why sometimes your answers are collapsed, I think, because there is a failure to understand exactly what you are saying, even though your answers are always well documented, as well as lack of knowledge about the colonization of Palestine. That is why your voice is so critical, Rima, because you give factual information that is seldom voiced on mainstream media, information about the true history of Palestine as well as the situation today.
The impression that lack of sufficient knowledge on the subject may be the cause of confusing Moderation decisions is expressed by Nathan Ali in a comment on my Collapse Detectives post:
https://collapsedetectives.quora...
It does look like the moderator did not know, understand or check that, for example, “Entire Jewish People” is directly referenced from Haaretz and instead took phrases like that as being in contravention of BNBR?
Here is to all of us aspiring to respect Quora’s vision “to share and grow the world’s knowledge”, including knowledge about Palestine.
_____________________
A recent example of how the system works: If you google the question I asked and answered on Quora about Omar Barghouti, you get “1 Answer” to the question “What kinds of questions are being asked about Omar Barghouti?”. That answer by Dave Saruya says, in part:
The right ones. How much money is he making by getting others to donate to causes he himself doesn’t follow unless it suits him? Why people think that a man born in Qatar, raised in Egypt, married to an Israeli woman to become a legal resident of Israel, and is trying to get people to boycott the very society and university that he got his master degree from and is a PhD candidate at while taking the free education and stipend from that government isn’t hypocritical?
As for my own answer to “What kinds of questions are being asked about Omar Barghouti?”, it has been deleted as violating a Quora policy that does not allow criticism of other writers:
So far, many of the questions about Omar Barghouti on Quora are neither neutral, nor sincere, as the following snapshot of a search conducted on Quora 4/20/2019 shows.
The first one about Barghouti getting a doctorate at Tel Aviv University is an old canard used as one of several Israeli PR attempts to falsely portray the co-founder of the Boycott, Divestment and Sanctions (BDS) movement against Israel as a hypocrite (where else is he supposed to go to university except in his own homeland?)
Top answerer Emet Shine, “Contributing Writer at Proudlycandid — 1001 Reasons to Love Israel”, candidly answers “How can Omar Barghouti be leading the Boycott Divestment Sanctions initiative against Israel including its universities while at the same time pursuing a doctorate at Tel Aviv University?” on Feb 5:
“That is a question complete with an answer. Barghouti is just a famous case. But many Arab prisoners are getting degrees in Israeli jails and those that are not getting degrees get exposure to Israel which they did not have before and it helps some of them understand that Israel is not the ‘bad guy’ they were brainwashed to believe.”
Top answerer on the second question, Antony Masefield, “Spent over a decade in MENA”, does his best on March 8, 2018 to counteract the question, “Are BDS supporters aware that leader Omar Barghouti has a financial interest in hurting the Israeli economy via his ATM business based in Ramallah?”:
“No.But are you aware why people, in part, support BDS? They support it because Israel profits by:
Throwing Palestinians off their ancestral lands and farms for Jewish people from other countries to occupy — and use those lands for export produce
Destroy Palestinians crops so Israelis can sell the same crops back to Palestinians
Prevent Palestinians from building their own factories (by restricting building materials or demolishing/bombing existing structures) so Israel can have a cheap source of labour for their factories?”
The question that follows is “Who besides Omar Barghouti comprises ‘Palestinian civic society’, and is also a current resident of Palestine/Israel, and is also an active advocate for the Palestinian Campaign for the Cultural and Academic Boycott of Israel (PACBI)?”
This one is rhetorical and has no answers yet. The description of the Palestinian Barghouti as “a resident” in his own homeland tells it all.
As for the last question, “Do you agree with the decision not to let the BDS co- founder Omar Barghouti into the United States?”, I answered that one, but the top answer posted is by Orem Frien, “an Atheist Assyrian in America”, who provides an answer that falsely accuses Barghouti of “terrorism, callousness, ludicrousness, and hypocrisy”, and totally misrepresents both BDS and Barghouti’s “beliefs”:
“Omar Barghouti’s beliefs, while fundamentally opposing my own (on numerous accounts as I will outline below), are not ones that rise to the level of danger that could put American citizens or persons residing in the United States in harm’s way.”
My own informative answer that allows the reader to hear Omar in his own voice is here (I am about to update it again and report Orem’s answer): Rima Najjar’s answer to Do you agree with the decision not to let the BDS co- founder Omar Barghouti into the United States?
_____________
Another example: I wrote the following question upon seeing numerous hasbara questions/answers about the second intifada: ‘What caused the Palestinians to rise up against Israel during the Al-Aqsa or Second Intifada?’
I wrote an informative answer based on documented research. Now, if you google that question, you will see the following two sorry answers (with an ad for Malwarebytes on top, and, ironically, they are “sponsored by TruthFinder”.
Paul Nicholson, Forensic Psychologist
Their incredibly corrupt leadership pushed for it to cover their own crooked tracks …don’t waste your time looking for Israeli oppression and other Palestinian slogans ,a month spent in the region will show you it’s Hamas and the PLO who do the oppressing of their own people. Have a look at the the decadent luxury they live in after stealing the billions of dollars donated by misinformed and well meaning governments ,and the way they keep their own people in poverty and blame the Israelis.
‘Michael Davison, lives in Israel (1969-present)
Answered Apr 22, 2019 · Author has 2.7k answers and 2.3m answer views
According to Yasser Arafat’s wife, the Second Intifada was pre-planned before Arafat set out to Camp David for “peace talks”:
Suha Arafat, Widow of Yasser Arafat: The 2000 Intifada Was Premeditated, Planned by Arafat
The reasons may be unclear, but were probably intended to cover the tracks of the PA’s mismanagement of funds meant to improve the quality of life for the Palestinians and create obstacles to any further talk of peace.
___________
As for my answer? You can get to it only if you know the url, not if you are googling for information on the second intifada. Here it is for comparison with the above:
Rima Najjar’s answer to ‘What caused the Palestinians to rise up against Israel during the Al-Aqsa or Second Intifada?’
Rima Najjar, retired professor, Al-Quds University, Palestine
All Palestinian uprisings, great and small, are a response to Israel’s shirking of its responsibility in the protection and wellbeing of the Palestinian people under its occupation, as required by international humanitarian law, particularly the Fourth Geneva Convention. Israel has long attempted to bypass responsibility in several ways, including rejecting the very fact of occupation.
When the Al-Aqsa or Second Intifada broke out, Israel again played semantics tricks in order to avoid constraining its military. It declared the Intifada “a conflict short of war” (“almost war” is not recognized under international law, and so no war, just like no occupation, means a pass for Israel), casting all forms of resistance as “terrorism” or even criminal activity, and in this way relieved itself of responsibility for state terrorism as it simultaneously nullified Palestinian rights to self-determination.
The Al-Aqsa Intifada raged for four years, from Sept 29, 2000 to Oct 2004, triggered by Sharon’s visit to Haram al Sharif, the compound housing Al-Aqsa Mosque on Sep. 28, 2000, amid the dawning realization among Palestinians that the Oslo “process” had been a trap and fears that Camp David would result in formalizing Israeli control over the occupied territory. The Intifada was a message from grassroots Palestinians to Arafat enjoining him not to sign Camp David, and pushing him to demand a better framework of negotiations to advance the Palestinian cause. Unfortunately, Arafat was unable to turn the momentum provided him by the uprising into action, and the “negotiations” continued to stall. Meanwhile Sharon capitalized on the Intifada to win a landslide election.
The Al-Aqsa or Second Intifada was a response to what Jeff Halper calls Israel’s Matrix of Control,
An Israeli in Palestine: Resisting Dispossession, Redeeming Israel by Jeff Halper (Pluto Press, 2008)
which conceals a repressive regime intended to permanently deny Palestinians self-determination and their basic human rights behind a façade of proper administration, physical constraints and ostensibly justified military control. It also reconfigures the entire country, ensuring that a viable Palestinian state will never emerge and the Matrix will control Palestinian life forever.” P. 173
During the Al-Aqsa Intifada more than 1000 Israeli civilians were killed, including 113 children, and around 6,000 injured. On the Palestinian side, 3, 500 Palestinians died, 85 of whom were civilians including 650 children. More than 29,000 were maimed or injured. (Palestinian Red Crescent Society)
It is safe to say that the civilian casualties on both sides were victims of terrorism, if we refer to the definition of terrorism as stated in the Fourth Geneva Convention Relative to the Protection of Persons in Time of War. That definition is inclusive and condemns all forms of terror from whatever source — from above (state terror) or from below (non-state terror).
It is also safe to say that Israel’s brutal response to the Al-Aqsa Intifada cannot be explained by security concerns alone. Just as Netanyahu’s government today no longer conceals the supremacist Zionist underpinnings of the state, Sharon’s concerns were as follows:
An Israeli in Palestine: Resisting Dispossession, Redeeming Israel by Jeff Halper (Pluto Press, 2008)
The challenge to Israeli hegemony had to be confronted, put down with resolute force, before “the Arabs” got it into their head that they had any legitimate claim to our land or were in fact our equal partners. Sharon was fond of saying he would beat the Palestinians “until they got the message”. P. 190
Image source: Hamas: Al-Aqsa Intifada revealed ‘futility’ of peace talks
1.4k views · View 34 Upvoters · View Sharers
________
I am currently banned from Quora. Someone posted the following question on Quora (now deleted) “Are you disappointed that Rima Najjar’s account was banned, most likely because of her standing up for Palestine?”. Benay Blend’s answer brought up important issues related to the discourse on Palestine/Israel on Quora and our struggle to carve out Spaces in which the Palestinian perspective is respected.
Yes, obviously I’m disappointed for several reasons:
She is my co-administrator for two vibrant, growing Quora Spaces — Solidarity Song and One KM to Palestine. Each Space provides a place where Palestinian voices can be heard. Solidarity Song also brings in international movements that have found a way to connect the dots to the Palestinian struggle. Without her there to share ideas, it feels like I am only working with one hand.While this latest ban has been stressful there have been such beautiful comments in support by Quorans who have appreciated her unique presence on the site and witnessed several comebacks. Not all of these voices have been Palestinian. Some are Israelis who might not agree with Rima but admire her clear, rational, informed posts that perhaps challenge them to think differently.
Rima’s writing on Quora is often published elsewhere and, as she acknowledges Quora at the end, not only is her writing appreciated in a wider context than Quora, but it also gives Quora publicity. Recently one answer she wrote that she used as the basis of an essay in Medium was distributed widely on that site by the curators.
For all of the thoughtful comments, there have been a few that I feel have violated BNBR in a serious way. For example, she has been called a “Goebels style propaganda artist” who is guilty of “hatred, incitement of violence, falsified facts, etc…. No positive input.” These false comments lack even one quotation in substantiation. While there have been times that Rima has been very positive, perhaps optimistic would be a better word, that comment led me back to my own teaching days. I was told by the Dean that I should be more positive in my lectures, but when I asked him how to put a positive spin on slavery, he was not able to come up with an answer. How should Rima put a positive spin on the Nakba (catastrophe) of the Palestinian people? As for the rest, she has meticulously documented all of her answers.
Rima has just posted on Facebook the following meme, which encapsulates her attitude to her writing: “To write with power, on Quora or elsewhere, you must find the essence of things.”
*Finally, I believe that there is a smear campaign against Rima which is perhaps the most disappointing of all. This fits into a larger context of similar campaigns against Ilhan Omar, Alice Walker and Marc Lamont Hill, all of whom have been victims of weaponization of the charge of anti-Semitism. When this happens, it not only damages the victim, but trivializes the real problem of anti-Semitism as exhibited by the shooting at the synagogue yesterday in California. The shooter was a self-described white nationalist, who dislikes Jews as well as Muslims. Dividing the Jewish community from other targeted groups just makes us weaker.
____________
For me, the Quora environment is hostile in a way I don’t personally experience on any other social media platform in which I am active. In trying to manage my experience there, I have formulated it as a question of etiquette, within the context of Quora’s “Be Nice, Be Respectful” policy:
… there is another issue I would like to bring up here on this forum. It has to do with the baffling general reluctance on Quora to accept the Palestinian Nakba as a colossal human tragedy. Dismissing it, denying it, “disputing” it, blaming Palestinians for it, justifying it, or excusing it are rhetorical arguments heard here in a way that should be a clear violation of BNBR rules and human decency at minimum, but aren’t.
For those who don’t know what the Nakba is, here is a link: What is the Nakba?
The lack of awareness (or sensitivity, if you like) I mention above is simultaneously coupled with an insistence that we use the language of symmetry On Quora, as a matter of civility, to describe the tragedy that has befallen millions of Palestinians. In other words, we are required to discuss our Nakba as a “conflict” rather than as a dispossession imposed on us by a Zionist regime.
The result of what I describe above are hundreds, if not thousands, of answers and comments insisting on assigning blame and responsibility for the tragedy to the victims themselves, with no thought for the utterly desperate reality of Palestinians that continues to unfold today unabated with real suffering of real human beings.
___________
I also wrote about the Quora environment regarding Palestinian speech in an answer (to the Question Why do you write on Quora? What do we writers get out of it?) that I pinned to my Quora profile (now deleted):
I write on Quora because I have a strong desire to integrate Palestinian rights into the Quora universe, based on universal rights and the need for justice, equality and freedom for all people.
I sit in my corner of Quora continuously fending off a specific set of attacks and demands meant to silence my Palestinian voice.
The attacks come in the form of verbal assaults on me personally with false accusations of anti-Semitism, because Israel’s PR deliberately conflates anti-Zionism with anti-Semitism.
Then there is the stream of responses to questions that deny both my identity and my homeland; Zionists are still outrageously claiming here on Quora that there is no and never has been a Palestine and that therefore there are no Palestinians. Not only are these claims historically false, they are or ought to be considered harassment under BNBR rules on a par with denial of the Holocaust.
The demand is this: that I use the language of symmetry to describe the tragedy that has befallen me and millions of Palestinians.
Following are examples generated in responses to a question about me someone posted that Benay Blend kindly answered.
Ami Elat’s answer in its entirety reads: “I think Rima describes it [my family’s experience] quite extensively and often in her posts. Whether what she was told, or her recollections are accurate, is another story, but at least she is polite about it.”
But at least I am polite about it! Hooray for BNBR rules.
Richard Blutstein’s answer is much lengthier. In it, he rewrites history with the intention of painting the victim as aggressor and vice-versa, a long-standing Israeli PR ploy on Quora: “If the local Arabs had not attacked the Jews in 1947, there would have been two peaceful states one Arab and one Jewish living peacefully side by side.”
Blutstein’s focus is on questions of blame and responsibility, with no thought for the tragic reality of Palestinians continuing to unfold today unabated with real suffering of real human beings.
He goes on: “The local Jews were supportive of the remainers to remain but the Israeli government had other ideas and pressured them to accept land in the nearby village of Fureidis.”
By “remainers”, Blutstein is referring to Palestinians in Haifa who managed to remain in their homeland (although displaced from their destroyed village and not allowed return) after 1948. My then young mother was cut off from her family there (she was with her husband’s family who were living, during the war, in Lifta, Jerusalem district) and died at an early age pining for them.
Blutstein, in the above, exonerates “local Jews” from what was happening to my mother’s family, and blames the Israeli government, but he embraces Zionism, the racist 19th century ideology from Eastern and Central Europe that created a regime of apartheid and colonialism over Palestinians. In fact, he begins his answer by saying: ‘The word ‘Zionists’ is used pejoratively in this question. But to answer it.’
Within Israel too, and not just in Quora, the conversation between Zionists and Palestinians goes along the same lines. [Watch video: Palestinians march in Haifa on 70th anniversary].
And at the end of his answer comes the final straw — one in which Rebecca Sealfon joins him in the comments section of his answer: “If she really wanted to be effective at improving the lot of her people she would be working for ‘normalization’ between Jews and Arabs. Normalization is the key to peace and is specifically illegal under the PA.”
So, I write on Quora to expose this “key” for what it is:
I invite both Richard Blutstein and Rebecca Sealfon to read Benay Blend’s excellent answer in which she explains at length why normalization is “a malicious and subversive process that works to cover up injustice and colonize the most intimate parts of the oppressed: their mind.”
And I invite them both (and you) to read and co-administer what Benay Blend and I post in these two Quora Spaces we just created:
1. One Km to Palestine: https://www.quora.com/q/mgsnasddsnskcgxi
2. Solidarity Song: https://www.quora.com/q/znjvubgdvkndwusm
Being silenced on Quora and being harassed are two different things. Despite attempts to silence me (collapsed answers “by mistake”, bans “by mistake”, etc.) I believe Quora values my contribution. But I do feel harassed.
_________
After months of waiting for a response to my request to Quora for a Space on Palestine, we were finally given the go-ahead to create two spaces just a couple of weeks before my ban. We called them ‘One Km to Palestine’ and ‘Solidarity Song’. This is how we describe the mission of the former:
About One Km to Palestine
news, commentary and analysis with a difference — Najjar/BlendDetails
Palestine
… This land gives us
all that makes life worth living:
Lady Earth, mother of all beginnings and endings,
She was called Palestine
and she is still called Palestine.- Mahmoud Darwish
This Space of everything Palestine is directed at the group of people, Jews and non-Jews, who have had a conventional introduction to Israel, presented to them as a triumph, the fulfillment of struggle to create a country for Jews around the world, omitting the reality that, for Israel to exist as a Jewish state, the Palestinian people had first to be brutally dispossessed of home and property, their culture and history erased.
Palestinians continue to demand their internationally recognized right of return to their homeland — as well as the right to claim that right! At the same time, Israel remains a foreign place to most Jews around the world who have no intention of leaving their national homes of origin and emigrating to Israel. By including a “roundup” of news, analysis and Palestine-centered commentary and advocating for one secular, democratic state for all in Palestine/Israel, we will present what is taking place there, not as a “conflict”, Quora Topics notwithstanding, but as a struggle for liberation and as a Palestinian revolution.
In Solidarity Song, we wrote:
About Solidarity Song
Reaching out in solidarity to all peoples struggling for liberation
Details
‘Solidarity Song’ is the title of a Bertolt Brecht poem. The following lines of the poem encapsulate the concept of this Quora Space.
‘Forward, without forgetting
Where our strength can be seen now to be!… All the gang of those who rule us
Hope our quarrels never stop
Helping them to split and fool us
So they can remain on top.’This space began with the idea of reaching out beyond the borders of Palestine to other peoples’ struggles for liberation. We invite you to share posts, links, questions — anything relevant to anti-colonial struggles and postcolonialism (analysis/explanation of the cultural, social and economic legacies of colonialism) round the world. We hope that by sharing our stories we can learn and gain strength and inspiration in order to maintain steadfastness, ‘sumoud’ in Arabic, as we face the oppressor in our various struggles for justice and liberation.
We are inspired by the following definition of solidarity:
“What constitutes being ‘in solidarity’ in the human and civil rights movements entails being able to take direction from those one claims to be in solidarity with. Learning how to take direction, as to what is it that those we are in solidarity with wish us to do, is a huge aspect of shifting the relationships of power between the oppressed and the oppressor. It is also a way to really come face to face with our own true commitment and power issues.”— Adrian Boutureira Sansberro
And we are informed by the analytical framework of intersectionality, “which suggests that instances of marginalization of individuals and groups based on a targeting of factors such as their race, ethnicity, nationality, gender, sexual identity, sexual orientation, or religion, are interlinked. While every struggle is unique, the recognition of structural and/or symbolic relationships between individual experiences of oppression has often resulted in formulations of solidarity. From South Africa to Indigenous America, Palestinians have found allies in other populations who experience expulsion, dispossession, and concentration. In particular, Black-Palestinian solidarity has been strong for decades.” — Denijal Jegić, [Intersectionality and Israel’s Transnational Violence, March 19th, 2019]
Let’s start the conversation!
In answer to a question someone posted (now deleted), “What did Zionists do to Rima Najjar and her Family?”, Benay Blend wrote:
When I saw this question, I asked Rima if it would be ok for me to answer it. Through her I have come to know her family, so it was an honor to write this for my friend. Rima comes from a Palestinian, Muslim family, her father from the depopulated village of Lifta, now in ruins west of Jerusalem, and her mother comes from the destroyed and depopulated village of Ijzim, south of Haifa. Once Israel was established in 1948, it confiscated her family’s lands and property and handed them over to immigrant Jews. On her mother’s side the al-Madi family guest house in Ijzim, one of the few homes that was not destroyed, is now a hotel in Israeli hands, its history falsified in an advertisement.
Her family is only one of many who met this fate. Despite their displacement, Rima considers herself Palestinian. Like many of the writers that I’ve come to know, there is a strong connection to the land that will never be severed. I’m not sure that Americans who move about so much, can understand the pain of not being able to live in that land. In an essay for Biography’s special edition, Life in Occupied Palestine, she wrote:
Life in Abu Dis Continues Quietly
Because my Palestinian identity was so indelibly part of my psyche, I could no longer say “Jordanian” and, later on, “American” without feeling like a fraud. I knew and continue to know full well what it means to be a Palestinian; I am still sorting out, even after all these years, what it means to be Jordanian or American — or, for that matter, the hyphenated variety of these terms.
Update: About another member of her family, Rima Najjar writes:
“My own great uncle (my grandmother’s brother) Yahya Hammoudeh became the chairman of the PLO in July 1968. Less than a year later, Yasser Arafat, the head of Fateh, became chairman as both Fatah and the popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine (PFLP) made substantial political gains.”
I could go on writing about what the Zionists did to Rima’s family in 1948 during the Nakba, and again in 1967, during the Naksa. Hers is the story of all of the Palestinians who retain their keys, waiting to go home. But her family is also one of the most resilient (sumoud in Arabic), brilliant, resourceful and despite everything optimistic families I have ever known. Her cousin, Ali Abunimah, is the founder of the Electronic Intifada, an online news source that features daily news, opinions and blogs; her aunt Aida Najjar, is a historian of Palestinian history; her sister, Taghreed Najjar writes beautiful children’s books in Arabic, and the list could go on of her illustrious family. Rima’s father, Aref Najjar of Lifta, Jerusalem, an architect and contractor, built what would become the al-Quds Airport. Several members of her family flew out of that airport to attend university in Beirut.
Today the airport is nothing more than a control tower. It has no name, a symbol of what the Zionists did to that neighborhood. It lives on in her family’s memory though, and because of that no matter how hard Israel attempts to erase the memory of Palestine, it won’t happen. Because of families like hers, chroniclers of these events, the past will never be forgotten.
I don’t believe that people should have to suffer to become stronger, but when confronted with this question, that came to my mind before the long history that displaced people endure until they are granted the legal right of return to their country. Please read Rima Najjar’s answer to Why do you write on Quora? What’s in it for us, the writers? It would help add context to this answer.
References:
Palestine is now the birthright of Trump’s grandchildren rather than mine
____________
For serious writers like Doug Sandlin, Benay Blend’s and my presence on Quora serves to enrich his own answers, as he kindly acknowledges at the end of his excellent answer to a question I posted:
What is the difference between legitimate and illegitimate criticism of Israel?
Doug Sandlin, Has Studied Israel-Palestine Related Issues For Years
Answered Apr 20, 2019 · Author has 3.8k answers and 4.3m answer views
Examples of Legitimate Criticism:
Example #1:
“The current government of Israel is perpetrating crimes, as defined by international humanitarian law, against millions of innocent Palestinians. They need to stop doing that, for ethical, legal and pragmatic reasons. The only way long term peace is possible is for Palestinians to have the inherent human and legal rights to which they are due.”
Example #2:
“Zionism is a harmful ideology because it justifies ongoing harm to millions of non-Jewish people — Palestinians, specifically — who are so harmed solely because they are not Jewish, yet are under the control of the Israeli government and military.”
Example #3:
“The Jewish state of Israel cannot be considered legitimate until such time as it ceases to violate international humanitarian laws related to the millions of non-Jewish Palestinians under its control, and ceases violation other international law with respect to land acquisition and annexation by force.”
Explanation
Please note that the opinions expressed above are not based solely on my personal opinions, but are examples of criticism that I feel is legitimate because it is specific, and expresses opinions that are derived from facts — and does not globalize criticism of people (i.e. all Jews, all Israelis, etc.) who may not, in any way, warrant being included in such criticism.
Important Note: Some readers may disagree strongly with one or more of the criticisms expressed above — which has nothing at all to do with whether a given instance of criticism is legitimate or illegitimate.
Examples of Illegitimate Criticism:
Example #1:
“The Jews are colonialist oppressors! They kill Christians and Muslims! Israel is a rogue state and should not exist!”
Example #2:
“The Jewish state is just like the Islamic state, with Jews in charge.”
Example #3:
“All Jews are to blame, because all Jews support Israel’s oppression of Palestinians!”
What’s the difference between the two sets of criticisms?
Legitimate criticism is specific.
Legitimate criticism targets the people and organizations engaged in the policies and/or actions being criticized.
Legitimate criticism expresses opinions derived from facts.
Legitimate criticism criticizes specific policies and actions, and why they are harmful, in the opinion of the critic.Illegitimate criticism is general, and engages in the logical fallacy of generalized, negative stereotyping — and, in the case of Israel, often makes the further illogical leap from criticizing Israel in general to criticizing “the Jews” in general.
This fallacious approach also ignores the reality that some of the most outspoken critics of the current government of Israel’s policies and actions against Palestinians are Israeli Jews, and other Jews outside of Israel — all of whom engage in legitimate criticism of Israel (the fact that their views may differ from those who equate “supporting Israel” with supporting the current Israeli governments ongoing harm and often-lethal actions against Palestinians does not change the legitimacy of their criticism in any way).
The problem
Illegitimate criticism, by its over-general nature, can easily be used as an excuse for always-mistaken, always-harmful, antisemitic ideas and behavior (aka bigotry against Jews), as well as for non-applicable criticism of the nation of Israel, and of Israelis, overall.
Over-generalizing takes what could be valid criticism, and renders it invalid by mistakenly criticizing people and groups who are not only not part of the problems being criticized, but many of whom (many Israelis; many Jews around the world), may see the issues being criticized exactly as the critic does.
The solution
Be specific.
Criticize the specific people and groups promoting the policies and taking the actions that are being criticized.
Base any criticism in facts, and be able to cite those facts from legitimate sources.
Criticize the specific policies and actions, and why you feel they are problematic.A Few Examples of Israeli / Jewish critics of Israel Who Provide Legitimate Criticism
Gideon Levy — Israeli Jewish journalist and author
Ilan Pappe — Israeli Jewish professor and author
The twisted logic of the Jewish ‘historic right’ to Israel | Opinion by Shlomo Sand, Israeli Jewish professor and author
Noam Chomsky: Israeli Support Eroding in America — Noam Chomsky, American Jewish professor, author and political commentator
Norman Finkelstein , American Jewish political scientist, professor and author
Bernie Sanders is poised to open up a painful intraparty debate about Israel — U.S. Senator Bernie Sanders, American Jewish candidate for president and author
Max Blumenthal — American Jewish political commentator and author
Benay Blend — former professor of American history; Quora writer.
A Few Examples of Palestinian critics of Israel Who Provide Legitimate Criticism
Noura Erekat — Palestinian American legal scholar, human rights attorney, and author.
Ali Abunimah — Palestinian-American journalist and author.
Rashid Khalidi — Palestinian American historian of the Middle East, the Edward Said Professor of Modern Arab Studies at Columbia University, and director of the Middle East Institute of Columbia’s School of International and Public Affairs.
Nur Masalha — Palestinian historian, academic and author.
James Zogby — Founder of the Arab American Institute; author.
Rep. Rashida Tlaib (D Michigan) — Congressional Representative.
Rep. Ilhan Omar (D-Minnesota) — Congressional Representative.
Rima Najjar — Palestinian, from Israel-Palestine; Quora writer.
EDIT:
Thanks to input from Rima Najjar and Benay Blend in the comments below, I have updated this answer extensively, in order to offer more clarity, balance and detail. Thanks very much to both of you for your input — it has helped to make this answer a lot better, I feel.
____________________
As for my own answer to a similar question (in which I argue it depends on who defines “legitimate” and explain how Palestinians view legitimacy in this context):
_______________
Here is an example of an answer collapsed through downvoting and flagged as “needing improvement”, a practice common among Zionists on the site meant to obscure the Palestinian point of view:
Is Israel a secular state capable of absorbing Palestinians in a one-state solution?
Rima Najjar, parents come from the districts of Jerusalem and Haifa
Yes, Israel is certainly capable of absorbing Palestinian refugees and exiles (those who wish to return, as is their right), but it is strongly opposed to restoring Palestinian rights, because that would mean turning Israel and all the Palestinian territory it controls into a secular and democratic state for all its citizens — i.e., it will no longer be a Jewish state.
Israel’s insecurity over the decades after its violent establishment on part of Mandate Palestine has always been rooted in the fear that one day a reckoning will be coming.
Ben Gurion, who served as Israel’s Minister of Defense as well as its first Prime Minister, anticipated that the international community would one day demand the restoration of Palestinian land and property to their legal owners and made devious plans to prevent such an eventuality from happening:
He ordered the demolition of several hundred Palestinian towns and villages and entered into a fraudulent deal with the Jewish National Fund (JNF), an international Jewish organization registered as a tax-exempt charity in the USA and Europe. The deal was a fictitious sale contract of choice Palestinian land adjacent to the armistice line in order to prevent the return of the refugees. This way, he would claim that this land was not under his control. The data for this fictitious deal is shown in [Fig-3]. JNF had expropriated most of the property of 372 villages on which it established 116 parks under the slogan clean environment.
JNF planted parks in order to hide the rubble of destroyed Palestinian homes and the cactus plants which refuse to disappear till this day.
Today, Israel is still agog with that same trepidation that Ben Gurion felt and is essentially defenseless against the power of the existential threat embedded in Israel’s political and social fabric.
A Haaretz piece published 21 March 2018 goes like this:
Palestinians’ new doomsday weapon has Israel scared to death
The first field trial is next week, the day of Passover. A new weapon against occupation, wielded by Palestinian refugees. And Israel, with its layers of defense against every manner of killing devised by man, is unprepared
Beginning on the day of the Passover seder, just a week from this Friday, Palestinians plan mass marches toward Israeli and Israeli-held territory, as well as sit-ins and vigils. They will press for Israeli and world attention to UN Resolution 194, the legal basis for what is known as the Palestinian Right of Return.
When I say Israel is capable of absorbing Palestinian refugees and exiles, I mean it is demographically possible for such an event to take place, as Salman Abu Sitta (researcher and author of Mapping My Return) shows in The Feasibility of the Right of Return, with little dislocation to the existing Jewish population:
http://prrn.mcgill.ca/research/p...
Although the relationship between the two has not been easy, the fact is the Palestinians and the Jews lived together for the last 50 years without major problems, not to mention centuries of Arab and Jewish harmony. The return of the refugees is consistent with existing concentrations of Jews and Palestinians and with their respective occupations. The return shall not cause dislocation of Jews and only minor voluntary relocation.
You can watch Dr. Abu Sitta’s presentation of his research here (given in 2017 at the International Law and the State of Israel: Legitimacy, Exceptionalism and Responsibility ):
Israel as a Jewish state has both an ethnic premise and a religious premise; they are manifested in law and the design of Israeli State institutions.
For one democratic and secular state to materialize in historic Palestine, Israel’s discriminatory laws and institutional designs must be dismantled, restitution must be made to Palestinians and all their fundamental human rights [see What is BDS?] must be restored.
[See also ethical decolonization: https://electronicintifada.net/b...]
1k views · View Upvoters · Answer requested by Vilnis Krumins
· Answer may need improvement
_______________________
The top answer to Is Israel a secular state capable of absorbing Palestinians in a one-state solution? that prevails on Quora is written by Orem Frien, a “Most Viewed Writer on Palestinians”, who concludes:
I believe that a one-state solution is a non-viable solution since the Jews and the Palestinians have developed an antagonistic relationship and would not function well in one-state. While the primary issue is that the political relationship between Jews and Palestinians at present is zero-sum system that would admit of violence and intransigence, I outline and discuss different reasons for this failure here: Orem Frien’s answer to Could Israelis and Palestinians live together in one bi-national state?
645 views · View Upvoters
sponsored by Lemonade InsuranceRenters insurance starting at $5/month.
Protect your phone, laptop, bike, and more in 90 seconds. Starting at only $5/month with Lemonade.
ad by SoFi
What’s a great way to save thousands on my student loans?
You can refinance with SoFi and join the 250,000 members who have already saved thousands.
Frien’s answer is followed by:
What is the best product roadmap tool?
The reason why Israel has a problem including Palestinians in a one common state solution is not so much the Jewish religion or ethnic identity. Jews are so well accustomed to live along non Jews during the last two millennia.
The problem is that Palestinians are not just Palestinians but Arabs and Muslims first.
What does this mean is that their true identity and loyalty lies outside the common state, let’s call it Isratin — Wikipedia like Gaddafi liked it. There is a reasonable concern that they might feel more solidarity towards a rival Arab state (Egypt, Syria or Iraq) that to what is sup…
And Katz is followed by:
Damon Atherly, Knows some things about Israel.
Israel is a secular Jewish state, but it’s status as secular or not has nothing to do with its ability to absorb Palestinians.
Lots of other answers say that Israel won’t absorb Palestinians into one state because absorbing so many Arab-Muslims would threaten the Jewish majority of Israel. That’s technically true, but misses the point and misses it big.
Israel won’t absorb these particular people because these particular people have been propagandized for generations to hate Jews and Israel. Granting them all citizenship without first working to reconcile their difference would be a recipe fo…
___________________________
Here is my answer to yet another question on the issue of “legitimate criticism of Israel” that is not deleted, but you cannot find it in a google search, unless you have the url:
What is ‘legitimate criticism’ of Israel and what is not, according to United States Congress?
Rima Najjar, lives in the United States of America
For the Congress of the United States, a political body attached by a political umbilical cord to AIPAC [See The dark roots of AIPAC, ‘America’s Pro-Israel Lobby’], legitimate criticism is finding fault with Israel that does not, at the same time, delegitimize its creation and existence in Palestine as a settler colonial Jewish state, a Jewish-majority democracy, underpinned by a Zionist ideology.
‘Legitimate’ fault is found when the strategic interests of the two states diverge and when the resulting rift is usually promptly healed or accepted by the U.S., albeit grudgingly.
Here are a few historic examples:
Legitimate: “Israel’s annexation of the Golan Heights is against U.S. interests.”
Legitimate: “Israel’s settlement policy in the West Bank is against U.S. interests.”
Legitimate: “Israel’s arms deal with China is against U.S. interests.”
References to the three ‘legitimate’ criticisms of Israel by the U.S. administration above are given context in the following excerpt on the site of the Jewish Virtual library — as examples of how “the U.S. has acted against the Jewish State’s wishes many times.”
U.S. Criticism of Israel
Ronald Reagan suspended a strategic cooperation agreement after Israel annexed the Golan Heights. … In 1991, President George Bush held a press conference to ask for a delay in considering Israel’s request for loan guarantees to help absorb Soviet and Ethiopian Jews because of his disagreement with Israel’s settlement policy … The Bush Administration also punished Israel for agreeing to sell military equipment to China in 2005.
If such relatively mild attitudes in the US Congress are dangerous to adopt, is it any wonder, then, that a furor in Congress has erupted regarding Ilhan Omar’s criticisms of Israel, which step outside the AIPAC specified box? [See There Is a Taboo Against Criticizing AIPAC — and Ilhan Omar Just Destroyed It]
Among the most threatening of delegitimizing criticisms of Israel is that related to the concept of “Jewish nationalism and domination” as described in the ESCWA report. See What definition for ‘apartheid’ does the ESCWA report “Israeli practices towards the Palestinian People and the Question of Apartheid” use?
The report’s finding? “This report establishes, on the basis of scholarly inquiry and overwhelming evidence, that Israel is guilty of the crime of apartheid.”
The major reason why the US and UN refuse to accept such “illegitimate” criticism is because, otherwise, they are held accountable:
The prohibition of apartheid is considered jus cogens in international customary law. States have a separate and collective duty (a) not to recognize an apartheid regime as lawful; (b) not to aid or assist a State in maintaining an apartheid regime; and © to cooperate with the United Nations and other States in bringing apartheid regimes to an end. A State that fails to fulfil those duties could itself be held legally responsible for engaging in wrongful acts involving complicity with maintaining an apartheid regime. The United Nations and its agencies, and all Member States, have a legal obligation to act within their capabilities to prevent and punish instances of apartheid that are responsibly brought to their attention.
___________________
And, finally, I’d like to end with Benay Blend’s answer to “Do the pro-Israeli writers, especially the most viewed ones on Palestinians pages, really believe they describe well what Palestinians have, feel and know?” It’s a thoughtful affirmation why it is so important to let Palestinians tell their own story on Quora and elsewhere.
The short answer is no. It’s important to understand from an academic standpoint, which is my training, that only Palestinians, for example, can truly narrate their own history. It’s their story, they lived it.
In his introduction to Ramzy Baroud’s The Last Earth: A Palestinian Story (2018), Ilan Pappe says the following:
It is through minute, almost forensic personal stories over a generational spread that one can fully understand the full impact that such multifaceted experience has on the individual as well as the collective psyche of Palestinians in general and on Palestinian refugees in particular (p. xi).
Pappe then goes on to explain the importance of Baroud’s style in conveying past events:
History is a story; that does not mean that is false or fabricated, or even fictional. But telling the story of history cannot be divorced from emotive undertones, anger, a sense of injustice, and hope. Scholarly work does not often succeed in reconnecting to these ever-present and normal aspects of humanity even when they write about human beings. The style allows us to connect to these vulnerable and at the same time empowering sides of humanity, even if at times they come through narrator (xv).
In these quotes Pappe elucidates why it is important to have a version of history different than the victors who impose their narrative on the victims. Rima has just posted on Facebook the following meme, which encapsulates her attitude to her writing: “To write with power, on Quora or elsewhere, you must find the essence of things.” In this way Palestinians become the subjects of their stories rather than the objects of narratives written by the winners to justify their victory. Indeed, in some instances, in some quotes, I’ve found that for Zionist writers believe Palestinians do not even exist. How then are they going to write that history?
Native Americans have been described by mainstream historians as either noble savages or just savages. Either/or. When I scroll through answers about Palestinians sometimes I find that dichotomy there too. For example, some collapsed answers view Palestinian writers on Quora as akin to Nazis, but there is no documentation because it is not there. Here Rima is described on Israel Currents as
“(one of) the most militant Palestinians on Quora,”
and here there is no documentation:
In Gaza you should see the Gaza-city and the Tunnels of Gaza. Warning: You are more likely to leave alive those tunnels that lead to Israel, than those that lead to Egypt. Unless you are a kid or short — in this case you don’t have much chance of leaving at all. Hamas Killed 160 Palestinian Children to Build Gaza Tunnels {.}
After emancipation white southerners feared reprisals, but for the most part that didn’t happen because former slaves just wanted to get on with building their lives. For the most part that is true of Palestinians too.
A large part of the problem, I think, is that some Quorans expect to see presented “both sides” of the story. For example,
I read her biased narrative exactly once-then avoided her further comments.Still,as this supposed to be an open forum,she had the right to be heard.Perhaps she will be re-instated.
The late historian Howard Zinn said that it is often not necessary to tell “both sides,” particularly if one side carries more moral weight than the other. Good historians need to understand the motives of slaveowners, for example, but they are not presented in the same light as slaves, who had no rights, no equality, no hope for a future. There is a predominance of the Zionist point of view on Quora and in the wider world. Plenty of chances to hear that side of the story, but not too many chances to hear Rima’s.
But back to the question, no. Unless you are Palestinian it is not your story. Being empathetic is very different than actually have lived that history. That is true for me too. For the past several years I’ve published chapters in literary textbooks about Palestinian writers, but it is not my history. I work very hard to get it right, but in the end, only Palestinians who have lived that history can write it accurately.
My answer comes from what we have come to accept in academic discourse, that only the person with that history can write a true version of their story. That doesn’t mean that I can’t do it, because of course I have. But I have to be constantly aware that I’m looking through my own lens, and in a self-reflexive manner bring that in into my writing.
___________________
Rima Najjar is a Palestinian whose father’s side of the family comes from the forcibly depopulated village of Lifta on the western outskirts of Jerusalem. She is an activist, researcher and retired professor of English literature, Al-Quds University, occupied West Bank. She contributes stories/opinion to PalestineChronicle.com and other publications.
📝 Read this story later in Journal.
