Speaker Spouted Immoral Propaganda

Lucia Anne Kalinosky

To the Editors:

This Tuesday, Oberlin Students for Israel hosted an event titled “Reflections of a Frontline IDF Soldier,” in which Sergeant Benjamin Anthony from the Israeli Defense Forces spoke about his experiences. The event was wildly offensive. Oberlin Students for Israel should be ashamed of themselves. This talk was the worst kind of propaganda in existence concerning the Israeli occupation of the Palestinian Territories. The content of this talk was morally repulsive. The most horrifying things Anthony said were the following:

  1. “The use of white phosphorous is a testament to Israel’s humanity.” He went on to explain that white phosphorus was used only for illumination and smokescreen purposes. This is simply false. Human Rights Watch, The Red Cross, Amnesty International and the United Nations have all reported on the use of white phosphorous as a weapon against civilians during the Israeli invasion of the Gaza Strip. This comment was clearly defending a war crime, for the use of white phosphorous against civilians is forbidden by the Geneva Convention.
  2. He places a higher value on Israeli life than he does on Palestinian life. Anthony attempted to support this statement by saying that because Palestinians voted for Hamas, they do not value Israeli life, and therefore he does not value theirs. Instead of explaining the leaps in his logic, I will simply state that it is never morally acceptable to assign differing values to human lives based on nationality.

In addition to these statements, Anthony repeatedly refused to answer questions and instead chose to talk around those that were asked during the question-and-answer section. Anthony’s visit in no way fostered dialogue.

In light of this, I am asking that Oberlin Students for Israel issue a public apology for the content of Anthony’s talk, especially the question and answer section. I suggest that this apology be made in a letter published in The Oberlin Review.

I would also like to request that Oberlin Students for Israel publicly clarify their positions on the use of white phosphorous and the relative value of Israeli and Palestinian life. If the views of the group are different from those of Sergeant Anthony, why was he invited to speak? Does the group see these viewpoints as valid? Does the group see advocating the use of white phosphorous as contributing to dialogue? Isn’t placing a different value on human life based on nationality an often-overlooked point of view in the discourse surrounding this subject? If the views of the group are the different from Sergeant Anthony’s, I think it is only appropriate that the Oberlin College community know how.

–Lucia Anne Kalinosky
College sophomore