Another very illuminating article has appeared in the Andover Townsman with further information on the activities of Andover High School teacher Ron Francis. (see background here, here, here and here)

Here are a few short snips and comments, but those who are interested should read the entire thing. Any bolding in quotes is mine.

Ex-Francis student: Our views were our own

There are several issues worth noting here. First, the most obvious is the idea that Francis is simply against the policies of the Israeli government. He and his groups clearly are not. They are against the existence of the State of Israel. One of Francis's affiliated groups, the NECDP (New England Committee to Defend Palestine), places the word "Israel" in quotation marks, for instance, and their goals are obvious, even to the point of extending support for the statements of Iranian President Ahmadinejad:

I'll not belabor the point with Solomonia readers concerning where the line is drawn between being anti specific Israeli policy and anti-Semitic. That's an argument we're all familiar with, and wherever it may lie, the SDP and affiliated groups and individuals are on the record as well over it. I will remark that I know some pretty thick-skinned Somerville residents who were appalled -- to put it mildly -- at what SDP had brought into their community.

Further, the student's response in the article and the responses in the comments of the first thread on this subject are an object lesson in why Francis's form of politics is wholly inappropriate to the high school setting. High school students simply do not have the experience to know what "radical" really is when they see it, or even when they're swimming in it.

Fringe groups like SDP are not in the education business. Such activist groups are, instead, in the indoctrination business. They do not exist to provide a resource, they exist to accomplish an objective, and if that objective requires using a few people along the way, then so be it.

Look, I understand that any high school student reading this might be offended by this, I certainly would have been when I was younger, but it's a fact. Young people try on different personalities, points of view and interests, they wear them for awhile to see how they fit and change them like the latest clothing. It's all part of the learning and growing process...the gaining of life experience.

Privileged high schoolers are told they're smart, participate in activities guided by adults, and seek and earn praise from their peers and mentors -- it's an environment custom-made for a predator like Ron Francis to step in with a glad hand, a friendly smile, a complimentary word and a gateway into the adult world with a promise of even more respect and real achievement in the world outside high school...the real world, the world of "purpose." It's not long before you're bragging about your demonstrated ability to make rational argument, while all you've really been doing is repeating someone else's political cant.

Once kids turn 18 and go off to college or work, they're more or less on their own. There's nothing you can do. But in the captive, sheltered world of the high school, the standard for those given access to our kids must be different.

Francis admits he recruited the kids to work for SDP, recruiting that wasn't coincidental, didn't happen because the kids opened the Yellow Pages and found him listed, and didn't happen because the stars aligned properly, it happened because Francis has access to these kids at the high school:

Astoundingly, it sounds as though Andover parents have been quiescent so far:

Andover parents, where are you? Bureaucrats don't make work for themselves without pressure.

I'll now skip down in the article to where Francis expresses his own views:

Again, lots here one could address, but I think most of it has been handled elsewhere -- this is familiar rhetoric. If you find my title on this post harsh, the fact is that while Francis states "I oppose violence against non-combatants," every other statement he makes belies that principle. While he may oppose violence against non-combatants in principle, it's quite clear he does not oppose them in practice.

The rape metaphor is particularly illuminating. Extremists often justify themselves by speaking from this highly removed perspective, where "Israel" becomes the rapist, and "Palestine" the victim -- yet somehow, where the rubber of this extraction hits the road, it becomes actual Israeli and Palestinian childrens' guts on the floor in the war Francis provides the advocacy for. It's not they, after all -- Francis, his groups, his students -- who'll run Palestine if he gets his way...it's Hamas.

Finally, this sort of extreme rhetoric has a nasty habit of throwing off its restraints and escaping far beyond the field that it was intended for. For what would you do to someone who was supporting a rapist in the midst of the act? What would you stop at?

That is where the danger in our towns becomes more than abstract arguments over events thousands of miles away, and more than just about intellectual malpractice and some mislead kids.

Update: I missed it when she first wrote it, but Boker tov, Boulder has a post in reaction to my first on this subject that's worth a look.