The smear campaign against Israel Insider

February 11, 2005

An Open Letter to Daniel Pipes, Steven Plaut, and Jonathan Tobin in response to their smear campaign against Israel Insider due to our decision to occasionally publish the writings of Barry Chamish. The correspondence from Pipes and his collaborators, mass-mailed to right-wing pundits including many Israel Insider columnists, are reprinted below, so readers can judge for themselves. The campaign also inveigled a leading big-paper columnist, a long-time colleague, who wrote to me and I responded candidly, as is reprinted below.

However, the campaign protagonists, without the columnist's permission, then circulated this private communication. In the end that may be for the best, as I stand behind my comments to the columnist and regret not a word of my defense of the controversial Barry Chamish to express his views and our right at Israel Insider to publish them. We respect the ability of our readers the right to decide for themselves regarding the merits of his arguments.

Following publication of the initial exchange, Pipes compounded his attempts at suppression -- this, too, and our response, is reprinted below.

The initial Israel Insider response to Daniel Pipes

Dear Dr. Pipes,
The trouble is that you, Jonathan Tobin and Steve Plaut apparently see yourselves as judge and jury for deciding who has a right to be published and who has a right to read what. If people disagree with you, your colleagues then "whisper" to your email lists about who is a "nasty loon" (to quote you about Barry Chamish) or (to quote Plaut about me) a "moron and a buffoon."

At least it makes an amusing rhyme.

Israel Insider has for four years, running daily, served as a forum for more than 500 writers from diverse points of view, contributing their perspective to show the diversity of views on and from Israel. You and Dr. Plaut and Mr. Tobin, who seem to be spearheading this smear campaign against Israel Insider for having the temerity to publish Barry Chamish's Lamentation for Adir Zik and some other pieces, are among them (each of you with more than 20 articles!).

http://web.israelinsider.com/Views/3873.htm (Pipes)
http://web.israelinsider.com/Views/4766.htm (Plaut)
http://web.israelinsider.com/Views/4880.htm (Tobin)

Obviously no one is challenging your right -- nor the right of any of your colleagues -- to submit or not submit to our publication. We provide an attractive and well-organized forum for your presentations and for our readers to talkback, and we have occasionally, and selectively, done the same for Mr. Chamish.

As an objective observer, I must say that your curious obsession with Chamish is perplexing. I understand that there is bad blood between you and a history of attacks and counter-attacks. But that doesn't quite explain why that needs to extend to attacking publications which publish his writings.

Surely you have enough outlets for your own opinions, without needing to squelch those of another writer who lacks the funding and connections that you enjoy! What is about Chamish's opinion that move you so to try to go to such great lengths to censor him, and us? Isn't it possible that he is right about some issues and wrong about others? Can't readers be allowed to distinguish for themselves?

I respect my readers, and fellow writers, editors and publishers enough to believe that they can read and form opinions and their own, without being censored or scared away by name-calling and gratuitous insults. Perhaps the "responsible right" -- to which you clearly believe you deserve to belong -- should assume also the responsibility to tolerate more dissent and differing opinions in our own ranks.

And when you write that I have "wildly attacked" you, you should either support that with at least one example of such an attack, or risk being dismissed as, well, paranoid or -- to use your own words -- a "nasty loon."

I have never written an insulting word against you personally, nor do I intend to. Although I do think you have not sufficiently explained your comment: "Should the [Israeli] government go ahead with the forcible removal of Jewish residents of Gaza, intra-Israeli violence appears to be a distinct possibility. Which in turn makes me wonder why the Israeli authorities do not take quite a different track and merely stop providing security for them." While I see that you have gone to great lengths to rationalize these comments, I am gratify to see that, in the end (http://www.danielpipes.org/blog/287), you regret them and realize the error of your ways.

I hope this suffices to end this little campaign of you and your buddies. All of you are welcome to keep contributing to Israel Insider, as long as you stop trying to squelch the opinions of others. But if you or your colleagues decide not to publish, I am sure we will find a way to survive without you.

I am sure your correspondents can also form their own opinons about whether they wish to give in to your censorship and boycott attempts, and I welcome those who have not contributed to our publication to see Israel Insider as a tolerant and diverse platform for news and views about the future of Israel.

It is this we should be working on, not fighting among ourselves.

Shabbat shalom to all!

Reuven Koret
Publisher
Israel Insider

What preceded and prompted our response

-----Original Message-----
From: [Daniel Pipes] Meqmef@aol.com [mailto:Meqmef@aol.com]
Sent: Friday, February 11, 2005 2:32 AM
To: splaut@econ.haifa.ac.il; jtobin@jewishexponent.com
Cc: [list of 25 columnists]
Subject: Israel Insider and Chamish

In a message dated 10-Feb-05 2:31:34 A.M. Eastern Standard Time, splaut@econ.haifa.ac.il writes [quoting Koret]:

We Jews and journalists especially careful about ad hominem attacks. Read the pieces of Chamish and judge for yourself.

this is rich, coming from someone (Reuven Koret) defending Chamish who has for years been attacking wildly all sorts of people, including yours truly.

this is not a grudge match between Plaut and Chamish but an ugly situation in which of the responsible right need to disassociate ourselves from a nasty loon.

for anyone interested in more on this topic, see http://www.danielpipes.org/blog/189

Daniel Pipes

From: Steven Plaut [mailto:splaut@econ.haifa.ac.il]
To: Tobin, Jonathan
Cc: [list of 25 columnists]
Subject: I am ending all connections with Israel Insider and urge you to consider doing the same

I will no longer be publishing anything with Israel Insider. I suggest that you do the same. It is a disgrace to appear on the same pages with Barry Chamish. The editor of Israel Insider is a moron and a buffoon.
Steve Plaut

On Wed, 9 Feb 2005, Tobin, Jonathan wrote:

Steve:

I reached out to [the big-city columnist] and asked him to join us in writing to Koret about Chamish. He agreed and wrote to him today. Although I did not rate a reply from the great publisher, [big-city columnist] got one right back. Here it is, along with [big-city columnist]'s original e-mail.

All the best,

Jonathan

From: [big-city columnist]
Sent: Wednesday, February 9, 2005 2:12 PM
To: jstobinpa@aol.com
Subject: Re Chamish

Hi, Reuven,

I understand that Steve Plaut, Daniel Pipes, and Jonathan Tobin have been urging you to stop promoting the conspiracy theories of Barry Chamish on your web site. Please add my plea to theirs. I don't know Chamish personally, but his writing has always struck me as reckless and unsubstantiated. I wouldn't want people thinking that my commentary is as unreliable and outlandish as his. Please don't undermine the credibility of Israel Insider and your other commentators by including Chamish's bizarre material on the site. It only undercuts the effectiveness and seriousness of what you are trying to achieve.

All the best,

[Tobin:] Here's what Reuven wrote in response.

Dear [big city columnist], I think you're a great writer but I am sick of Plaut's whispering and poison-pen campaign. He and some of his buddies are clearly afraid of what Chamish writes. His campaign to ban Chamish lowers my respect for him, and raises my suspicions that Chamish is getting uncomfortably warm.....

I accept nothing Chamish says at face value, and I publish only a fraction of what he writes. I edit tough even when I do publish. But even paranoids have people out to get them.

The man has guts, good instincts, and has a veracity batting average at least as good as Plaut's.

Now he's not Ted Williams, but I think he is more or less onto the truth about the Rabin assassination, and I have found that some, not all, of his other "conspiracy theories" have at least grains of truth.

We Jews and journalists especially careful about ad hominem attacks. Read the pieces of Chamish and judge for yourself.

http://web.israelinsider.com/Views/4964.htm

Reuven

ADDENDUM: Dr. Pipes moves to suppress

Dear Mr. Koret:

In reference to your note to me, there is no "smear" campaign -- no one has said a bad word about your website -- but there was a quiet "pressure" campaign to get you to choose between Barry Chamish and several of us writers. You decided to go public with this, not us, a decision I wish you had not made.

I did not give you permission to quote my private letter, one not even addressed to you, on the internet, and I request you take it down immediately.
Yours sincerely,
Daniel Pipes

Insider Response: We are not so easily moved

Dr. Pipes,

A "private letter" sent around to twenty-five editors and columnists, urging them to take action to boycott or pressure a publication (whose name appears in the subject line) unless it censors a writer you and your friends don't like is not "going public"?

Your comment, and Plaut's, would qualify as belonging to the public domain in any court in the land (any land!). My citation of it, which refers to me personally in a depreciatory manner, is certainly within my rights, both in terms of free speech and fair use.

Do you think the phrase "moron and buffoon" (Plaut's words for the "Editor of Israel Insider," circulated in the letter that the pundits above received) qualifies as a "smear," or do you disavow all association with Plaut as "several of us writers?"

Indeed it is Tobin (who says he did it unintentionally) and Plaut (who certainly did it intentionally) who circulated my private response to Jacoby, much to [the big-city columnist's] chagrin and displeasure. He who lives in a glass house shouldn't thrown stones.

If you really want to bring this issue to broader attention, or to take legal action, I invite you to do so, as I think this whole affair only casts you and your colleagues in a most unfavorable light and brings even more attention to Mr. Chamish and his opinions, and to Israel Insider as a publication with the guts to take on those who would suppress unpopular opinions.

And I must further correct you when you say that I am defending Chamish. I am defending his right to express his opinion and my willingness at the publisher of Israel Insider to take on would-be bullies, backed by powerful organizations and interests, who use routinely use scare tactics and legal threats in an attempt to stifle free speech and freedom of the press.

Shabbat shalom.
Reuven Koret

FORMER ISRAELI ARMY C-O-S RAPHAEL "RAFUL" EITAN MURDERED
Background:
On November 23, Gen. Raful Eitan was found dead in the waters of Ashdod port. Gen. Eitan was IDF Chief Of Staff in the 1980s when Ariel Sharon was Minister Of Defence. There are now widespread suspicions of foul play in Israel, in part because of a report widely read by the author of this article. I am no stranger to the subject of Israeli political assassinations. My book on the true circumstances of the assassination of a prime Minister, Who Murdered Yitzhak Rabin, made the top of the Israeli bestsellers list and has been translated into six languages. Cracking the Eitan murder was much easier than Rabin's. The media inadvertently exposed the crime within two days.

Day One
The media reports:(Israel national news)
Raful arrived at the Ashdod seaside early this morning, as he did every day, to oversee the continued construction of the new HaYovel Port. He drove up to the site, and while standing on the breakwater, was either overtaken by a large wave or slipped into the sea for other reasons. Only after an hour or more did his car attract attention, and a search began. A helicopter helped in the search efforts, and his body was found close to 8 AM. Resuscitation efforts by Magen David Adom teams failed to revive him.
Former Chief of Staff Rafael Eitan drowns
Eitan's vehicle was near the scene; he was apparently touring the site of the Ashdod Jubilee Port as part of his duties as project head.

Globes correspondent 23 Nov 04 10:00
Former Chief of Staff and government minister Rafael (Raful) Eitan was found dead this morning, the victim of drowning in the waters of the Port of Ashdod. Eitan's vehicle was near the scene; he was apparently touring the site of the Ashdod Jubilee Port as part of his duties as project head. Paramedics attempted to resuscitate him, but were not successful. Eitan was IDF Chief of Staff from 1978-83. In 1982, together with then Minister of Defense Ariel Sharon, Eitan formulated the plan to eradicate the PLO's military power in Lebanon that led to the 18-year long Lebanon War.
imra
Army radio reported that Eitan was hit by a large wave as he stood on a pier while taking on his cellular phone.

The Jerusalem Post:
Former chief of General Staff and cabinet minister Rafael "Raful" Eitan drowned early Tuesday morning after falling from a breakwater in Ashdod Port into the stormy Mediterranean. Eitan, 75, had been employed for the past two years by the Ashtrom construction company and served as project manager overseeing the construction of breakwaters for a new section of the port. Workers said that Eitan told a fellow worker in a telephone call at about 7 a.m. that he was on his way to the port to inspect equipment following Monday night's storm. The conversation was then cut off. Dock workers told police they saw Eitan arrive at around 8 a.m. He parked his car near the construction area and they lost sight of him. According to preliminary police findings, Eitan apparently was standing on the edge of one of the breakwaters his team was constructing and was swept into the sea by a large wave. The Ports Authority declared a state of emergency, and police, IAF helicopters and navy boats began searching for his body. Police said they were certain Eitan died in an accident and did not commit suicide. Senior officers, however, said they do not understand why he was standing on the breakwater when the waves were dangerously high. "The waves Tuesday were very stormy and particularly threatening," one senior officer said. "Eitan, who was known to be courageous, should have set himself more limits and should not have been there." At 9 a.m., an IAF helicopter located Eitan's body off the military section of the port. His body was retrieved shortly afterward by a group of navy divers and he was pulled aboard a navy ship, where attempts were made to resuscitate him. Transportation Minister Meir Sheetrit has ordered Ashdod Port director-general Shaul Rotem to establish a committee of inquiry to investigate the circumstances surrounding Eitan's death. The Eitan family expressed shock upon hearing the news of his death, voicing harsh criticism of the government for failing to send an official envoy to deliver the tragic news.

Ha Aretz:
In 1983 Eitan entered political life and established the Tzomet movement, which acted against the withdrawal from the Sinai Peninsula. In 2003 he was nominated to serve as logistic coordinator for the Ashtrom company, which was improving the breakwater at the Ashdod port. The Ashtrom company reported that the last contact with him was at around 7 A.M. Tuesday morning. He called from a cellular phone to senior company officials to report on the state of equipment at the site following an overnight storm. Ashtrom officials said the conversation was cut off, and, after they were unable to reach Eitan on his phone a search and rescue force was dispatched to the area.

Questions:
Did Eitan drown at 7 AM or 8 AM?
This is no minor issue.
Jerusalem Post: At 7 AM, Eitan calls someone to inform him that he is on the way to the port to inspect equipment. The call suddenly is cut off. Dock workers tell the police they saw Eitan arrive at 8 AM. The body is located at 9 AM.
Israel National News: Eitan is last seen at 7 AM and his body is recovered at 8 AM.
Galei Tzahal (Army Radio): Eitan is talking on his cellphone when a large wave cut it off.
Haaretz: Quoting Ashtrom, Eitan's company, he contacted them to report he was already at the site at 7 AM when the cellphone was cut off.

What was he doing on the breakwater in the first place?
The police are asking this question with excellent reason. Eitan wasn't an idiot. The Tuesday morning he died was wet and stormy. He could see the sea was churning. Why would be put himself in harm's way? A breakwater has two sides: a stormy one facing the sea, and a quiet one protecting the port. Now imagine the effort it would take him to drown. He would have to walk to the edge of the breakwater on the sea side. Why would he make such an effort to inspect equipment? The Mediterranean is not the Pacific. Swells can reach three meters; not enough to tow a man out to sea unless he went far out of his way to make sure it happened. We repeat the question the police are asking: why would he do that?

Smaller questions:
Why was Eitan alone in such conditions?
Why did no one see him fall in?
Eitan was a good swimmer. If he fell off a pier, why didn't he swim to safety a few feet away?
Couldn't Ashtrom have sent a worker to inspect the equipment? Was there some necessity for Eitan to arrive at 7 AM, an hour before work began, on a cold, rainy morning?
Why, in 2003, was Eitan given this job in the first place? He was a farmer and soldier, with no harbor building experience.
Why wasn't Eitan's family informed of his passing?