Honourable Bob Rae, et.al.
Liberal Party of Canada and others,
House of Commons,
Ottawa.
subject: the political crucifixion of Libby Davies 
Dear Bob,
I have contemplated this matter deeply and with sober second thoughts at every turn. And I feel I really must communicate with you all, including Mr. Harper and Mr. Layton). (Mr. Duceppe of course, represents the moderate voice in this matter).
It’s been disconcerting to me to have read the newspaper reports concerning your comments and those of the Prime Minister, about Ms. Davies. Let me be clear that I am speaking as a Canadian and as a supporter of Israel and its legal right to exist. I would say that Libby Davies’ record also shows she supports Israel’s right to exist. That fact makes your position all the more untenable. There’s a need here, for you gentlemen to be more thoughtful and respectful.
You, Mr. Rae, assert that Ms. Davies’ remarks were not made “off-the-cuff”.
I’d respectfully disagree.
From screening and re-screening the video – I would say the remarks were indeed made “off the cuff”. They were delivered as part of a rambling, conversational-style, street-side interview, conducted by a somewhat confused and incoherent amateur, in the heat of a demonstration. (As far as her personal support for boycott, divestment and sanctions are concerned…anyone who buys “Dead Sea Cosmetics” needs serious counselling.)
For someone of your stature to say, under these circumstances, “The logical implication of these comments [by Davies] is that Israel has no right to exist.”…beggars belief. You, as a Rhodes Scholar yourself, really ought take a higher road.
(She has since apologised for suggesting that the “occupation” began in 1948, saying that she misspoke.)
In fact, in my view, her apology was incomplete, partly because, like so many others, she is unaware of every one of the myriad historical details surrounding the creation of the State – as a result of the United Nations’ Partition Resolution of November 1947. History has a way of being forgotten until scholars begin to assess and analyse new evidence that comes to light. We’ve already seen that process at work in the writings of Israeli historians Ilan Pappe and Avi Shlaim among many others.
You may or may not be familiar with Dr. Roger Louis, a professor of English
History and Middle East Studies at the University of Texas at Austin. He’s head of the Historical Advisory Committee at the U.S. State Department, he’s on the Scholars’ Council at The Kluge Centre – (Library of Congress), Past President of the U.S. Historical Association, Editor in chief of the Oxford History of the British Empire etc etc. In other words he is a competent, distinguished and highly-respected academician, with no axe to grind.
Not long ago, Dr. Louis gave a very clear and erudite lecture at the Library of Congress, which covered – among other things – the shenanigans at the U.N. during 1947; those included coercion of delegates and vote-buying…all of which are documented and which eventually led to the passage of the November resolution, by a razor-thin majority. It would be very much worth your while to have a careful look at it.
As Dr. Louis points out, the U.N. resolution tested the accepted, democratic principle of self determination, since the rights of the majority of the inhabitants were simply ignored.
As for Davies’ reference to “occupation” – you know very well that the Zionist forces ended up taking more territory than they were legally entitled to under the international U.N. contract…and of course they never returned it…nor did they permit the return of those wrongfully-displaced persons to their homes and/or land.
In addition, Yitzakh Rabin has written about those tens of thousands of unarmed and utterly innocent civilian Palestinians, who were driven from their homes and land, which were also never returned. (Rabin’s writings – as you know – were censored by Israeli authorities, something that troubled him greatly). Rather, those homes and that land were simply seized as the spoils of “war” and handed over to immigrants from Europe. (That’s about as close to “occupation” as it gets). That was 1948.
[Note: Rabin lamented that situation, which was why - as Prime Minister - he worked so hard to reach a peace settlement. And he would have been successful had it not been for the assassin's bullet from the gun of an Israeli terrorist - a religious student, oddly enough]. We still do not know who assigned him that task.
Nevertheless, none of this means that Israel does not have the legal right to exist…it just means that the government of Israel is in breach of the very resolution on which the very existence of the State is based.
Unfortunately you, along with Mr. Harper and Mr. Layton have opened a can of worms with your calls for Davies’ ouster. Even many Canadian Jews and other supporters of Israel, of whom I am one, are disturbed by the apparent wilful blindness of your collective “outrage”. Much of the mainstream media – to their discredit – have parroted and endorsed your knee-jerk reaction.
But people are not stupid.
And as Shakespeare said, “Murder will out”. The debate has barely begun. You and the others will have to bear responsibility for the consequences of what may be coming down the pipe, as a result.
There is no threat implied here – please do not jump to another conclusion. I am simply suggesting that all of you find a way to ameliorate your positions.
I’m not angry at you gentlemen for ganging up on Libby Davies, rather I am 
deeply disappointed in you. I am simply amazed at your willingness to crucify a hard-working and responsible colleague under these circumstances. (I exempt Mr. Harper from any sense of amazement, because his motives are even more crass than your own).
As to the feelings of other informed observers, including that very distinguished gentleman Henry Siegman – they agree with me. I must say to you frankly on their behalf as well as my own – you are very far off base.
Sincerely,
Jim Reed.
