UNMIA

Editor’s note: This was added as a comment to the article, but due to the layout of the website and the length of both posts, we decided to post this as an article so that the public could find it and follow the discussion more easily.

From Mary E. Gossage:

Reading Lynn Provencio’s comments I was honestly offended by the way in which she tried to twist what was said by the two Palestinian women into something that was not said. Her “truth twisting” also lead her to create inaccurate “profiles” of the two Palestinian women. Its anyone’s guess why Ms. Provencio would want to trash the two Palestinian women in the way she did.

The comment about Wejdan’s experiences when returning home from graduate school in the U.S. is particularly offensive. Ms. Provencio says of the duress which Wejdan was under for seven day while trying to return home (after earning her Master’s degree in the U.S., via a prestigious scholarship - a fact which Ms. Provencio did NOT share in her comment): “[it] took seven days because she was not allowed back into Israel. She claims it was because of not having papers, which was probably part of the problem. It may also have had to do with her associations.”

The “association” that made Wejdan’s return difficult was her own identity - that of being born a Palestinian refugee in Gaza, which makes her a stateless person. It was Wejdan’s identity that put her under suspicion and caused some of the duress she experienced, the same as Israel’s treatment of any other stateless Palestinian. However what Ms. Provencio also failed to mention in her comment, which didn’t fit into the profile she was apparently trying to concoct for Wejdan, was that when Wejdan shares her experiences, by way of her finely tuned sense of humor (which Ms. Provencio also neglected to mention), she points out that her metal hips (because of a congenital problem) are a big part of the problem she has at checkpoints and airports. She never fails to set off the metal detectors. The fact that she carries medical documentation about her metal hip replacements when she travels does not put an end to the process that ensues after the metal detectors go off.

Ms. Provencio also criticizes the name of the annual project of Partner’s for Peace, the “Jerusalem Women Speak” tour, because none of the women are from Jerusalem - even though its common knowledge that Jerusalem holds a special place in the hearts of Jews, Christians, and Muslims. However, the women were introduced as Hagit being Jewish, Wejdan being Muslim, and Abir being Christian. Each year the tour consists of a woman who is Jewish, a woman who is Christian, and a woman who is Muslim. Very clearly their commonality is Jerusalem, because no matter how different from one another their life experiences might be, they do have in common the love of Jerusalem that is found in each of their religions.

Given the tenor of Ms. Provencio’s critical denigrating of the two Palestinian women, her rant sounded as if it could have come directly from a pulpit of one of the churches that so strongly supports “Israel First”. I say this because Ms. Provencio’s is the same approach - that being, instead of bringing up what is believed to be the merits of Israel’s policies toward Palestinians, misinformation and twisted truth analyses are presented which demonize Palestinians - the same as the nature as Ms. Provencio’s comments that are a prevaricated translation of the personal experiences shared by the women.

While I certainly can’t find fault with anyone’s right to support Israel’s political Zionist policies, I certainly do find fault with the manner in which Ms. Provencio may have thought she was doing so, by unjustly denigrating the experiences of the two Palestinian women.

What I understand the actual message of Ms. Provencio’s comments to be, from how she says what she says, is that she finds the life experiences of the two Palestinian women to be offensive - simply because they are Palestinians.

Even though one of the Palestinian women, Abir, is Israeli and makes it very clear the peace work she does is with the best interests of both Israel and a Palestinian nation in mind, Ms. Provencio twisted her words too, because Abir is actually very sympathetic to Israel, and considers it her home. She says she wants what’s best for Israel and fellow Israelis. She also says that she sees no reason this “best” can not also include what’s best for Palestinians - an end to the occupation. In fact she makes it clear that to end the occupation would not only be best for Palestinians but also for all Israeli’s.

These three “Jerusalem Women” simply want to tell Americans about their lives. They shared their personal experiences which included the commendable peace work each of them does. But Ms. Provencio’s comments aimed to denigrate their lives which are shaped by their environments.

If Ms. Provencio wants to find fault, then why isn’t it with the environments of these women? Why isn’t she asking what it is about their environments that obviously make their lives so offensive to her? If she had really listened to what they were saying maybe she would have understood and appreciated their efforts to provide her with that insight.