They have no right to be there"
In this case the specific criticism is just used to introduce a wider attack on Israel.
Wholeheartedly agreeing with the claim would only lend the apparent support of a Jewish student to a far-ranging attack on Israel. An Israel activist could respond by disputing the general claims: "Regardless of this incident, it is not true to say that the Palestinians as a whole are being oppressed by the Israelis. In fact, 99% of Palestinians are currently living under the Palestinian Authority and not under Israeli rule. Things will no doubt return to 28 www.wujs.org.il
The Principles of Israel Advocacy
normal when Palestinian terrorism stops." This approach accepts the criticism of Israel, but quickly reframes the debate in a wider context.
Criticise Actions not Existence
In general the role of an Israel activist is to defend Israel (as a country), but not necessarily to endorse every action of the Government, Army or people. If a Jewish activist genuinely disagrees with some action, it is legitimate to say so, provided this is done in a way that defends and supports Israel as a country, and attempts to place the action in the context of a complex situation. This can be done by reframing comments, for example: "I understand where you are coming from, personally I also think that it was wrong of the army to destroy those houses, however you should also consider that Israelis are under a daily threat of terrorist attack and…"
For more on this point see Communication Styles: Point Scoring and Genuine Debate – p. 8
On some occasions defending certain actions is counterproductive to Israeli interests and morally wrong. For instance when the Jewish terrorist Baruch Goldstein massacred Palestinians at prayer in Hebron in 1994, the Israeli Government condemned the action. It is always right to immediately condemn actions of this sort.
Thankfully it is rare that situations are this clear cut. In more ambiguous situations Israel activists should find ways of accepting justified criticism, while still defending Israel as a country. When an Israel activist accepts a limited criticism of Israeli Government action, it can create an impression of openness and balance, and can increase the chances of being trusted when talking about other issues.
It is important to distinguish between specific and general criticisms of Israel. Even Israel activists who don't support the approach of a specific Israeli Government should be wary of criticising the government in general terms. Criticism levelled at ministers or the government can undermine attempts to defend Israel at a later date. People who start by making specific justifiable complaints about Israel often go on to make unfair general criticisms. Israel activists need to be careful to tread the fine line between being true to themselves and the facts as they see them, and not allowing enemies of Israel leverage to attack Israel unfairly.
There is an argument that Jews living in the Diaspora have no right to get involved in debates about Israeli policy, and ought instead to support Israel's every action. However, the fact remains that Israel activists are used by Israel for an important purpose, and this means that Jewish student activists around the world are involved, in some way, in the Israeli political www.wujs.org.il 29
Hasbara Handbook: Promoting Israel on Campus
process. Furthermore, Jewish students, as the targets of anti-Israel attacks, are affected by Israeli policy. For these reasons, it is generally considered reasonable for Jewish students to express opposition to specific Israel policies, but, as noted above this ought to be done in a constructive manner that doesn't give ammunition to those seeking to undermine Israel's very right of existence.
Winston Churchill once said, "When I am abroad I always make it a rule never to criticise or attack the government of my country, I make up for lost time when I am at home"
CAMERA
"
http://world.std.com/~camera/
Resource