In a recently published blog post in The Times of Israel, titled “Ending Violence Against Palestinians in Judea and Samaria Is Urgent,” Dr. Richard H. Schwartz, with contributions from Rabbi Shammai Engelmayer, presents readers with a sweeping and scathing indictment of Jewish residents in Judea and Samaria. The piece attempts to paint an entire community with a broad brush of systemic criminality, relying on a familiar chain of authorities: statements by opposition politicians such as Ehud Olmert and Ehud Barak, declarations from foreign governments, press releases from organizations such as Commanders for Israel’s Security, and opinion columns by figures such as Bret Stephens.

Dr. Schwartz presents this as a moral imperative rooted in Torah ethics. But a closer examination raises a serious question about how the argument is constructed: Can political statements, secondary media reports, and foreign commentary be treated as though they establish objective, empirical truth?

To understand the narrative being presented, we must first examine the basis of its claims. Dr. Schwartz cites former prime ministers and political opponents as though their pronouncements establish factual reality. But politicians involved in domestic political struggles do not speak from a position of neutrality. Their statements may reflect political positions, ideological commitments, or attempts to influence public opinion. They cannot automatically be treated as impartial findings of fact.

The same applies to foreign governments, political organizations, and opinion writers. Quoting one source after another does not necessarily strengthen an argument if all the sources are repeating or interpreting the same underlying allegations. A chain of secondary reports can create the appearance of extensive evidence without actually establishing the facts independently.

This phenomenon of seeing one’s own land primarily through criticism and reports from afar is not new.

In Talmud Chullin 63b, our Sages discuss the non-kosher bird called the Re’ah, which the Gemara identifies with the Ayah. The Gemara asks why it is called Re’ah and answers: “שרואה ביותר” — it sees exceptionally well. The Gemara then says: “תנא עומדת בבבל ורואה נבלה בארץ ישראל” — it can stand in Bavel and see a neveilah, a carcass, in Eretz Yisrael.

Chazal’s description lends itself to a powerful lesson. The bird has extraordinary vision, but what does it choose to see? A neveilah........

© The Times of Israel (Blogs)