Articles

WRMEA, August 2010, Pages 24-26

Three Views

The Campaign Against Helen Thomas

Helen Thomas Deserves Praise

By Paul Findley

FEARLESS, decent seeker-of-truth Helen Thomas, 89, the pre-eminent challenger of political power for a half-century as dean of White House correspondents, has resigned her position with Hearst Newspapers. She acted in the wake of controversy that erupted when she was asked by a rabbi, during Jewish Heritage Week, for any comments on Israel. "Tell them to get the hell out of Palestine." While speaking plainly on behalf of the rule of law in occupied Palestine, her message was submerged when reporters gave it an anti-Semitic twist by quoting words out of context.

It is a sad finale to an unprecedented career in aggressive, constructive journalism. In her departure from the White House newsroom, America is the loser. The Washington press corps contains few with Thomas' talent in challenging power close-up.

The fiasco started when Thomas was asked to comment on Israel after a White House briefing in late May. In an extemporaneous burst of passion she said, "Tell them to get the hell out of Palestine. Remember, these people are occupied, and it's their land." When asked where they should go, Thomas said they should "go home to Poland, Germany, America and everywhere else." Her intent was unmistakable: Jews are unlawfully residing in occupied Palestine and should leave. She made no reference to Jews in pre-1967 Israel, where all Jews can lawfully reside.

Out-of-context reports on her comments stirred angry controversy. Several commentators failed to report the words "America and everywhere else." This left Thomas' quoted words suggesting only Poland and Germany, countries identified with extermination camps for Jews in World War II, as the only destinations for those Thomas would expel. The warped reports led Diane Nine, her longtime literary agent and friend, to cut ties. She was uninvited after agreeing to be commencement speaker at a Washington, DC-area high school, and was falsely smeared as a bigot and anti-Semite by leaders of Jewish organizations. Time columnist Joe Klein wanted her moved from her traditional front row seat to the back at future White House news briefings. Former White House press secretary Ari Fleischer, who served President George W. Bush, told reporters she should be fired by employer Hearst Newspapers or at least lose her White House credentials.

Attempts to link Thomas' outburst to Nazi crematories are contemptible. In denouncing Thomas, Klein and others mention only Poland and Germany as places Thomas wants Jews now in Palestine to go. If they included "America and everywhere else," as Thomas actually stated, the attempted linkage of past Holocaust crematories would be blurred if not lost.

True to her reputation, Thomas spoke up for human rights, the fundamental property rights of Palestinians that are violated at an ever-rising pace in occupied Palestine by the government of Israel, with no serious opposition from the United States, Israel's main benefactor. Thanks to an intimidated U.S. media, most Americans are unaware of the plight of Palestinians, who are all Arab and mostly Muslim. Almost all Jews who live in what is left of Palestine are euphemistically called "settlers" by U.S. media, not as unlawful occupiers. By residing in Palestine, they violate international law, Geneva Accords, and clear stipulations of the U.N. Charter. The rare exceptions are a handful of Jews who belong to a peaceful, independent sect.

This dark, undeserved cloud over the reputation of an unrelenting grand champion of human rights will have a silver lining if it awakens the American people to their own quiet, complicit role in Israel's sustained violation of Palestinian rights.

I offer unique credentials in defending Thomas. Although a lifelong admirer, I first met her in October 2009 at a dinner in Washington. When I greeted her, she addressed me as They Dare to Speak Out Findley, using the title of my bestseller book published in 1985. At my invitation she spoke this past April to a capacity, enthusiastic crowd at Illinois College in Jacksonville, Illinois. While hosting her at dinner the previous evening, I found her a delightful, warm, compassionate human being dedicated to equal justice for all.

For her edifying outburst, Helen Thomas should be congratulated, not condemned. It could prove to be one of her finest contributions in our nation's often-faltering quest for justice.

Cashiering Helen Thomas

By Ralph Nader

The termination of Helen Thomas' 62-year-long career as a pioneering, no-nonsense newswoman was swift and intriguingly merciless.

The event leading to her termination began when she was sitting on a White House bench under oppressive summer heat. The 89-year-old hero of honest journalism and women's rights, the scourge of dissembling presidents and White House press secretaries, answered a passing visitor's question about Israel with a snappish comment worded in a way she didn't mean; she promptly apologized in writing (see <http://www.democracynow.org/2010/6/8/veteran_white_house_reporter_helen_thomas>). Recorded without permission on a hand video, the brief exchange, that included a defense of dispossessed Palestinians, went Internet viral on Friday, June 7.

By Monday, Helen Thomas was considered finished, even though she embodied a steadfast belief, in the praiseworthy words of Washington Post columnist Dana Milbank, "that anybody standing on that podium [in the White House] should be regarded with skepticism."

Over the weekend, her lecture agent dropped her. Her column syndicator, the Hearst company, pressed her to quit "effective immediately," and, it was believed that the White House Correspondents Association, of which she was the first female president, was about to take away her coveted front row seat in the White House press room.

Then, Helen Thomas announced her retirement on Monday, June 10. No doubt she's had her fill of ethnic, sexist and ageist epithets hurled her way over the years—the very decades she was broadly challenging racism, sexism and, more recently, ageism.

Although the behind-the-scenes story has yet to come out, the evisceration was launched by two pro-Israeli war hawks, Ari Fleischer and Lanny Davis. Fleischer was George W. Bush's press secretary who bridled under Helen Thomas' questioning regarding the horrors of the Bush-Cheney war crimes and illegal torture. His job was not to answer this uppity woman but to deflect, avoid and cover up for his bosses.

Davis was the designated defender whenever Clinton got into hot water. As journalist Paul Jay pointed out, he is now a Washington lobbyist whose clients include the cruel corporate junta that overthrew the elected president of Honduras. Both men rustled up the baying pack of Thomas-haters during the weekend and filled the unanswered narrative on Fox and other facilitating media.

Then, belatedly, something remarkable occurred. People reacted against this grossly disproportionate punishment. Ellen Ratner, a Fox News contributor, wrote, "I'm Jewish and a supporter of Israel. Let's face it: we all have said things—or thought things—about 'other' groups of people, things that we wouldn't want to see in print or on video. Anyone who denies it is a liar. Give her [Helen] a break."

Apparently, many people agree. In an Internet poll by The Washington Post, 92 percent of respondents said she should not be removed from the White House press room. As an NPR listener, R. Carey, e-mailed: "D.C. would be void of journalists if they all were to quit, get fired or retire after making potentially offensive comments."

Listen to Michael Freedman, former managing editor for United Press International: "After seven decades of setting standards for quality journalism and demolishing barriers for women in the workplace, Helen Thomas has now shown that most dreaded of vulnerabilities—she is human....Who among us does not have strong feelings about the endless warfare in the Middle East? Who among us has said something we have come to regret?.... Let's not destroy Ms. Thomas now."

Katrina vanden Heuvel, editor and publisher of The Nation, wrote: "Thomas was the only accredited White House correspondent with the guts to ask Bush the tough questions that define a free press.... Her remarks were offensive, but considering her journalistic moxie and courage over many decades—a sharp contrast to the despicable deeds committed by so many littering the Washington political scene—isn't there room for someone who made a mistake, apologized for it and wants to continue speaking truth to power and asking tough questions?"

Last week, in front of the White House, people calling themselves "Jews for Helen Thomas" gathered in a small demonstration. Medea Benajmin, co-founder of Global Exchange, declared that "We are clear what Helen Thomas meant to say, which is that Israel should cease its occupation of Palestine and we agree with that." While another demonstrator, Zool Zulkowitz, asserted that "by discrediting Helen Thomas, those who believe that Israel can do no wrong shift attention from the public relations debacle of the Gaza flotilla killings, and intimidate journalists who would ask hard questions about the Israeli occupation of Palestine and American foreign policy."

Helen Thomas, who grew up in Detroit, is an American of Arab descent. She is understandably alert to the one-sided U.S. military and foreign policy in that region. Her questions reflect concerns about U.S. policy in the Middle East by many Americans, including unmuzzled retired military, diplomatic and intelligence officials.

In 2006 when George W. Bush finally called on her, she started her questioning by saying, "Your decision to invade Iraq has caused the deaths of Americans and Iraqis. Every reason given, publicly at least, has turned out not to be true." Or when she challenged President Obama last month, asking "When are you going to get out of Afghanistan? Why are we continuing to kill and die there? What is the real excuse?"

Asking the "why" questions was a Thomas trademark. Many self-censoring journalists avoid controversial "why" questions, thereby allowing evasion, dissembling and just plain B.S. to dominate the White House press room. She rejected words that sugarcoated or camouflaged the grim deeds. She started with the grim deeds to expose the doubletalk and officialdom's chronic illegalities.

What appalled Thomas most is the way the media rolls over and fails to hold officials accountable. (British reporters believe they are tougher on their prime ministers.) This is a subject about which she has written books and articles—not exactly the way to endear herself to those reporters who go AWOL and look the other way, so that they can continue to be called upon or to be promoted by their superiors.

The abysmal record of The New York Times and The Washington Post in the months preceding the Iraq invasion filled with Bush-Cheney lies, deception, and cover-ups is a case in point. As usual, she was proven right, not the celebrated reporters and columnists deprecating her work, including the Post's press critic, Howard Kurtz.

Thomas practiced her profession with a deep regard for the people's right to know. To her, as Aldous Huxley noted long ago, "facts do not cease to exist because they are ignored."

Lastly, there is the double standard. One off-hand "ill-conceived remark," as NPR ombudsman Alicia Shepard stated in praising Ms. Thomas, ended a groundbreaking career. While enhanced careers and fat lecture fees are the reward for ultra-right-wing radio and cable ranters, and others like columnist Ann Coulter, who regularly urge wars, mayhem and dragnets based on bigotry, stereotypes and falsehoods directed wholesale against Muslims, including a blatant anti-semitism against Arabs. (See <http://www.adc.org/education/education al-resources/> and Jack Shaheen's book and companion documentary about cultural portrayal of Arab stereotypes,

Ms. Thomas' desk at the Hearst office remains unattended a week after her eviction. One day she will return to pack up her materials. She can take with her the satisfaction of joining all those in our history who were cashiered ostensibly for a gaffe, but really for being too right, too early, too often.

Her many admirers hope that she continues to write, speak and motivate a generation of young journalists in the spirit of Joseph Pulitzer's advice to his reporters a century ago—that their job was to "comfort the afflicted and afflict the comfortable."

Don't Single Out Helen Thomas

By Saree Makdisi

Unconscionable. Offensive. Hurtful. Bigoted. Terrible. Hateful.

These are the words being used to describe Helen Thomas' recent comment about Israel and Palestine. Editorialists across the country have condemned her statement that Jews should "get the hell out of Palestine" and "go back" to Europe.

Let's agree that she should not have said those things, and that a just and lasting peace in the Middle East fundamentally requires reconciliation between Palestinians and Israeli Jews. We need also to agree on a formula that allows them both to be at home in the same land (I have long advocated the idea of a single democratic and secular state for both peoples; a state that treats all citizens as equals). Insisting that either people does not belong is not merely counterproductive; it lies at the very root of the conflict.

If, however, it is unacceptable to say that Israeli Jews don't belong in Palestine, it is also unacceptable to say that the Palestinians don't belong on their own land.

Yet that is said all the time in the United States, without sparking the kind of moral outrage generated by Thomas' remark. And while the nation's editorialists worry about the offense she may have caused to Jews, no one seems particularly bothered by the offense felt every day by Palestinians when people—including those with far more power than Thomas—dismiss their rights, degrade their humanity and reject their claims to the most elementary forms of decency.

Are we seriously to accept the idea that some people have more rights than others? Or that some people's sensibilities should be respected while others' are trampled with total indifference, if not outright contempt?

One does not have to agree with Thomas to note that her remark spoke to the ugly history of colonialism, racism, usurpation and denial that are at the heart of the question of Palestine. Part of that history involves vicious European anti-Semitism and the monumental crime of the Holocaust. But the other part is that Palestinians were forcibly removed from their homeland in 1948 to clear space for the creation of a state with a Jewish identity.

Europeans and Americans were, at the time, willing to ignore or simply dismiss the injustice inflicted on the Palestinians, who, by being forced from their land, were made to pay the price for a crime they did not commit.

But this callous carelessness, this dismissal of—and refusal even to acknowledge in human terms—the calamity that befell the Palestinians, and of course the attendant refusal to acknowledge their fundamental rights, did not end in the 1940s. It continues to this very day.

Mainstream politicians, civic leaders, university presidents and others in this country routinely express their support for Israel as a Jewish state, despite the fact that such a state only could have been created in a multicultural land by ethnically cleansing it of as many non-Jews as possible. Today, Israel is only able to maintain its Jewish identity because it has established an apartheid regime, both in the occupied territories and within its own borders, and because it continues to reject the Palestinian right of return.

Where is the outrage about that?

Where was the outrage in 1983 when Israeli Gen. Rafael Eitan looked forward to the day that Jews had fully settled the land, because then "all the Arabs will be able to do about it is scurry around like drugged cockroaches in a bottle"? Or when Alan Dershowitz suggested in 2002 that Israel summarily empty and then bulldoze an entire Palestinian village as a punitive measure each time it was attacked? Or when New York Times columnist Thomas Friedman claimed in 2006 to have discovered a "pathology" that caused some Arabs to "hate others more than they love their own kids"? Or when Avigdor Lieberman (who now serves as Israel's foreign minister) said in 2004 that Palestinian citizens of Israel should "take their bundles and get lost"? Or when Israeli professor Arnon Sofer, one of the country's leading demographic alarmists, said that to preserve the Jewish state, Israel should pull out of Gaza, though that would require Israel to remain at the border and "kill, and kill, and kill, all day, every day"?

An endless deluge of statements of support for the actual, calculated, methodical dehumanization of Arabs in general and Palestinians in particular goes without comment; whereas a single offhand comment by an 89-year-old journalist, whose long and distinguished record of principled commitment and challenges to state power entitles her to respect—and the benefit of the doubt—causes her to be publicly pilloried.

To accept this appalling hypocrisy is to be complicit in the racism of our age.

Saree Makdisi is a professor of English and comparative literature at UCLA. He is the author of, among other books, Palestine Inside Out: An Everyday Occupation (available from the AET Book Club). This op-ed first appeared in the Los Angeles Times, June 13, 2010. Reprinted with permission.

• < Prev
• Next >