US Indymedia Global Indymedia Publish About us
Printed from Boston IMC :
IVAW Winter Soldier

Winter Soldier
Brad Presente

Other Local News

Spare Change News
Open Media Boston
Somerville Voices
Cradle of Liberty
The Sword and Shield

Local Radio Shows

WMBR 88.1 FM
What's Left
WEDS at 8:00 pm
Local Edition
FRI (alt) at 5:30 pm

WMFO 91.5 FM
Socialist Alternative
SUN 11:00 am

WZBC 90.3 FM
Sounds of Dissent
SAT at 11:00 am
Truth and Justice Radio
SUN at 6:00 am

Create account Log in
Comment on this article | View comments | Email this article | Printer-friendly version
News ::
Natalie Portman tells Muslim Propagandist to stick it up her ass
19 Apr 2002
Modified: 22 Apr 2002
On Wednesday, the Jerusalem-born actress objected tartly in the Harvard Crimson to law student Faisal Chaudhry's April 11 essay on U.S. policy concerning Israel and the Palestinians. Chaudhry framed the Arab-Israeli violence as "Israel's racist colonial occupation" in which "white Israeli soldiers destroy refugee camps of the brown people they have dispossessed for decades
Lovely Natalie Portman is gearing up for the May 12 premiere of "Star Wars: Episode II Attack of the Clones," in which she plays Senator Padme Amidala, but this week the 20-year-old Harvard junior is focusing on earthbound conflicts.

On Wednesday, the Jerusalem-born actress objected tartly in the Harvard Crimson to law student Faisal Chaudhry's April 11 essay on U.S. policy concerning Israel and the Palestinians. Chaudhry framed the Arab-Israeli violence as "Israel's racist colonial occupation" in which "white Israeli soldiers destroy refugee camps of the brown people they have dispossessed for decades."

Natalie Portman in the upcoming "Star Wars: Episode II--Attack of the Clones." (Industrial Light & Magic - Lucasfilm, LTD. via AP)

Portman, who immigrated to the United States with her family in 1988 and lived briefly in Washington, wrote to the student newspaper that Chaudhry's racial rhetoric "is a distortion of the fact that most Israelis and Palestinians are indistinguishable physically. The Israeli government itself is comprised of a great number of Sephardic Jews, many of whom originate from Arab countries. The chief of staff of the army, the minister of defense, the minister of finance . . . and the president of Israel are all 'brown.' One might have an idea of the physical likeness between Arabs and Israelis by examining this week's Newsweek cover on which an 18-year-old female Palestinian suicide bomber and her 17-year-old female Israeli victim could pass for twins."

Portman continued: "Outrageous and untrue finger-pointing is a childish tactic that disregards the responsibility of all parties involved."

Yesterday the 25-year-old Chaudhry speculated that the Crimson published the letter only because Portman is a movie star. (She signed it with her family name, which is well known on campus, and we agreed to her request not to publish it here.) But the Crimson's editorial page editor, David DeBartolo, told us: "We thought that it was a very good letter on its own. It presented an important point of view. Basically, we ran the letter on the merit of its contents."
See also:
Add a quick comment
Your name Your email


Text Format
Anti-spam Enter the following number into the box:
To add more detailed comments, or to upload files, see the full comment form.


Useless Fighting
20 Apr 2002
This discussion is totally useless. Tracing the bloodlines of some Israelis and some Palestinians has nothing to do with the problems in Palestine. Israel has illegally occupied Palestinian land for over 50 years. Israel has built illegal settlements on this stolen land. Israel has denied the self-determination of the Palestinian people protected by international law. Whether some Israelis might have the same bloodlines as some Palestinians has nothing to do with this illegal, racist occupation. Race is a social construct. Israel discriminates against a socially constructed ethnic group - Palestinians. This is racism, whether or not they share some bloodlines. Ultimately, every human being shares a common bloodline. Tracing bloodlines obscures the heart of the conflict - illegal occupation by Israel. Israel and its supporters believe that they can just sidestep the fact that they are illegally occupying Palestinian land by focusing on suicide bombers and Israel's security. The truth is that, if you look at the history, Israel was the initial aggressor - Israel invaded Palestinian land in 1948, not the other way around. It was Israel that was expelling Palestinians from their land during the years leading up to its declaration of independence. The fact of the matter is that Israel's occupation of the West Bank, Gaza Strip, and Golan Heights is illegal under international law. This is regardless of who initiated any conflicts. Just because you have a problem with your neighbor does not give you the right to invade them. This becomes crystal clear when you compare the situation in Palestine to the Gulf War. Iraq invaded Kuwait because it was using tilted oil pumps to steal oil under Iraq, among other things. No one can deny that when a nation is stealing your oil, you should have a remedy. But the international community has decided that violence is not a proper method to solve international conflicts. Iraq was comdemned for invading Kuwait, and rightly so. But Israel deserves the same condemnation. When you invade someone's land, destory their homes, and make them live in refugee camps you cannot use their subsequent violence to justify your illegal occupation.

The genesis of Israel as a nation came fron the 1947 UN Partition plan, a plan which also created Palestine. Therefore, if Israel has a right to exist as a state, which it surely does, then Palestine has an equal right to exist. If you recognize Israel, you must recognize Palestine - their legitimacy must be equal because their legitmacy comes from the same document.
who says that you define the truth?
21 Apr 2002
your ignorance is evident when you state that this started in 1948.
21 Apr 2002
Oh come on factychecker... bore me!
Who is igrnorant?
21 Apr 2002
I think you might be the person that is ignorant of the true facts.

Never did I state that the problems in Palestine started in 1948, to the contrary I did point out that the Jewish population began to terrorize and expel Palestinians before Israel became a state. All I stated was that Israel became a state in 1948. There is no debating this point - check the facts Israel declared independence on May 14, 1948. By this time Israel had already invaded and occupied lands granted to the Palestinians in the 1947 UN Partition Plan. Therefore, the illegal occupation by Israel began in 1948. I don't see how this is debatable or controversial - it is the truth. One can debate whether the illegal occupation is justified or not (using racist or religious justifications), but it is a fact. To refuse to recognize this fact is historical revisionism of the worst sort - steal someone's land and then argue that they never had a right to it.
stolen land... i doubt it
22 Apr 2002
Prior to 1967 when the Jews in the area were banned by the Palestinian Arabs from visiting Jewish holy sites - no one said anything about occuptation, but those same no-one's now acknowledge those sites. How can that be? BY YOUR OWN LOGIC, THE ARABS WERE ILLEGALY OCCUPYING JEWISH LAND.