I can understand why the president needs a vacation. But I doubt that ten days at Martha’s Vineyard will do it. I am not sure that the President of the United States ever gets a vacation. I can imagine that there is always someone following him around wherever he goes with a telephone and news reports. He would probably love to have a few days beyond the criticism of those who seem to be appalled that during a time of financial crisis he could think of anything but addressing their concerns.
What I don’t understand is how so many members of our Congress who delight in questioning the President’s loyalty to the American people can take their own recess to spend time, not among their constituents, but in Israel. During this time of financial anxiety, members of Congress from all across America, are not home listening to the concerns of their own people. They are in Israel listening to the moans of the Israeli government. While Americans plead for action, our law makers are focused on the expansionist ambitions of another country. What a profound commitment for those elected to represent the needs of the people who voted for them.
I am also offended that the media in such countries as Britain, Iran, India and Lebanon found this conduct news worthy, while our own U.S. media has offered little, if any, coverage of this action of about a fifth of our congress who act as thought they have been elected to represent Israel.
Of course, to be fair, I understand that their first class trip to Israel is not just a free junket. In the words of Stephen Walt, our 55 Republican and 26 Democrat members of Congress are expected to dance to the piper’s tune:
Why do Congresspersons do this, especially when it is obvious that they ought to be worrying about conditions here at home? Mostly because such junkets burnish a legislator’s ‘pro-Israel’ credentials and facilitate campaign fundraising. … Steny Hoyer (D-Maryland) has reassured Israelis that financial challenges “will not have any adverse effect on America’s determination to meet its promise to Israel.” Translation: we may be cutting Medicare and Social Security for U.S. citizens, but Israelis – whose country has the 27th highest per capita income in the world – will continue to get generous subsidies from Uncle Sucker.[1]
Josh Ruebner is more specific:
Members of Congress will be expected to sing for their lavish dinners by honoring President Bush’s 2007 pledge to provide the Israeli military with $30 billion of taxpayer-funded weapons, between 2009 and 2018. So far, proposed increases in military aid to Israel have been spared from the budgetary chopping block by President Obama and a compliant Congress that treats Israeli militarism as more sacrosanct than medical care for seniors.[2]
One thing for sure, our eighty-one will not be shown the conditions in which people are forced to live in Gaza and the West Bank. They will celebrate the greatness of Israel without giving one thought to the blood, pain and suffering that other people are paying for that “greatness.” They will not hear a word about Palestinian human rights or the right of Palestinians to live free of occupation. They will come home filled with the memory of Yad Vashem and a fear of saying anything that might offend Benjamin Netanyahu.
My main concern is not just the inability of Congress to address the financial needs of so many Americans but the lack of compassion on the part of our leaders for the suffering people of Palestine they so eagerly finance. Money to Israel means misery for the Palestinians. It’s unbelievable that our leaders cannot see this, or worse still, can see it very well and just don’t care.
Thomas Are
August 26, 2011
[1] Stephen M. Walt, The Greatest Elected Body that Money can Buy, (Antiwar.com, August 11, 2011).
[2] Josh Ruebner, Robbing Peter to Pay Israel, (Antiw ar.com. August 12, 20110
Saturday, August 27, 2011
Thursday, August 4, 2011
I Would Hate To Be President
I would hate to be the president of the United States. I can only imagine the agony of knowing what you were elected to do and being unable to follow through because to do so would cost you your job. And it’s not just a job; it’s having the opportunity to make so many other things right, or at least better… such as health care, protecting the environment, gay rights, welfare for the needy and race relations.
The thing that bothers me the most is how a president who seeks so hard to care for the “least of these,” can do so little to address the suffering of the Palestinian people.
“ Some nations may be able to turn a blind eye to atrocities in other countries. The United States of America is different,” said the president when sending bombs against Muammar Qaddafi. of Libya. At the same time he was silent when Israel bombarded Gaza, killing more than 1400 people. including 350 children.
Others spoke out.[i] According to Norman Finkelstein:
Israel had to cope with a mountain of human rights reports condemning its crimes in Gaza that began to accumulate after the ceasefire. Because of the sheer number of them, the wide array of reputable organizations issuing them, and the uniformity of their major conclusions, these reports could not be easily dismissed.”[ii] I don’t think this humanitarian crisis is easily dismissed by Barack Obama, but Israel’s conduct is in every affect dismissed, even when it cost American lives.
Obama is not the first president to turn his back on American citizens in peril. In 1967 Israel attacked the U.S.S. Liberty, an intelligence gathering ship with no combat capability, killing 34 U.S. service men and wounding 171 others, two thirds of it crew. When the Aircraft Carrier, The U.S.S. Saratoga, thirty minutes away, launched fighter jets in response to the Liberty’s call for help, Lyndon Johnson, unwilling to embarrass an ally, ordered them back. It was dawn of the next day, 15 hours after the attack, before medical aid reached our wounded. Of course, Israel said it was a “mistake.” Immediately, Johnson ordered a cover-up. The surviving crew, upon pain of court marshal, were ordered to not speak of the attack to anyone, not even their families.
Admiral Thomas Moorer, no less than Chair of the Joint Chief of Staff said,
The clampdown was not actually for security reasons but for domestic political reasons. I don’t think there is any question about it. What other reason could there have been? President Johnson was worried about the reaction of Jewish voters… I will never buy the idea that the pilots did not know this was an American ship. The attack was deliberate.[iii]
Dean Rusk, Secretary of State agreed, “I never accepted the Israeli explanation.”
Even if it was a mistake, which no one believes anymore, deliberately shooting up life rafts in the water of a ship in distress is a war crime. If it’s not, it should be. Yet, to this day, there has been no congressional investigation of the attack on the Liberty. Was Johnson afraid of Israel? Hardly. He was afraid of the ire of the American Jewish voting community and its lobby.
George Ball, former undersecretary of state wrote, “If America’s leaders did not have the courage to punish Israel for the blatant murder of American citizens, it seemed clear that their American friends would let them get away with almost anything.[iv]
That was in 1967. Little has changed. Last month, Stephen Zunes, professor of politics and chair of Middle Eastern Studies at the University of San Francisco charged:
The Obama administration appears to have given a green light to an Israeli attack on an unarmed flotilla, carrying peace and human rights activists – including a vessel with 50 Americans on board – bound for the besieged Gaza Strip. At a press conference on June 24, Secretary of State Hillary Clinton criticized the flotilla organized by the Free Gaza Campaign by saying it would “provoke actions by entering into Israeli waters and creating a situation in which the Israelis have the right to defend themselves.”[v]
Two questions need to be addressed; Since when did the entire Mediterranean become Israel’s waters and in what way does an unarmed humanitarian ship threaten any civilized nation? This effort is one of a series of flotilla seeking to deliver aid to Gaza. The previous one (May 13, 2010) resulted in a commando rid on the Mavi Marmara which killed nine people, including an American.
How can our elected officials be so blind to Israel? I remember our congress jumping up and down like a jack in the box, 29 times giving standing ovations to Benjamin Netanyahu. One can only imagine what President Obama could do for the American people and the hurting people of the world if congress would give that kind of support to him. And why does he not have that support? Does anyone think our politicians, who after being elected and sent to Washington to represent us, might be afraid of AIPAC, the American Jewish Committee, an anemic media and the Christian Right’s obsession with a wild haired end of the world scenario?
There are times when I wish the president would simply declare himself to be a one term president and do the things he knows are right and just. On the other hand, I realize that it would not just be his downfall, but many others in congress. Those who would be defeated in 2012 would be the very ones who in their hearts support the kind of peace through justice for which so many of us are working. Again, I would hate to be the president of the United States.
Thomas Are
August 5, 2011
[i] Some of those organization who have consistently condemned Israel for its abuse of the Palestinians would include: The International Court of Justice. Human Rights Watch, Amnesty International, B’Selem, International Red Cross, Save the Children, Doctors without Borders. and the United Nations Human Rights Council. In fact, I have read of no critic of Israel who after investigation became pro-Israel.
[ii] Norman Finkelstein, This Time We Went Too Far., (OR Books, New York, 2011) p.55.
[iii] Paul Findley, They Dare to Speak Out. (Lawrence Hill, New York., 1989) p. 179
[iv] James Scott, The Attack on the Liberty, Simon and Schuster, 2009.) p.287.
[v] Stephen Zunes, Washington Okays Attack on Unarmed U.S. Ship, Antiwar.com, July 2, 2011. As of July 19, 2011, The American Ship, The Audacity of Hope is being held up in Greece. Two other ships of the flotilla have been sabotaged and severely damaged.
The thing that bothers me the most is how a president who seeks so hard to care for the “least of these,” can do so little to address the suffering of the Palestinian people.
“ Some nations may be able to turn a blind eye to atrocities in other countries. The United States of America is different,” said the president when sending bombs against Muammar Qaddafi. of Libya. At the same time he was silent when Israel bombarded Gaza, killing more than 1400 people. including 350 children.
Others spoke out.[i] According to Norman Finkelstein:
Israel had to cope with a mountain of human rights reports condemning its crimes in Gaza that began to accumulate after the ceasefire. Because of the sheer number of them, the wide array of reputable organizations issuing them, and the uniformity of their major conclusions, these reports could not be easily dismissed.”[ii] I don’t think this humanitarian crisis is easily dismissed by Barack Obama, but Israel’s conduct is in every affect dismissed, even when it cost American lives.
Obama is not the first president to turn his back on American citizens in peril. In 1967 Israel attacked the U.S.S. Liberty, an intelligence gathering ship with no combat capability, killing 34 U.S. service men and wounding 171 others, two thirds of it crew. When the Aircraft Carrier, The U.S.S. Saratoga, thirty minutes away, launched fighter jets in response to the Liberty’s call for help, Lyndon Johnson, unwilling to embarrass an ally, ordered them back. It was dawn of the next day, 15 hours after the attack, before medical aid reached our wounded. Of course, Israel said it was a “mistake.” Immediately, Johnson ordered a cover-up. The surviving crew, upon pain of court marshal, were ordered to not speak of the attack to anyone, not even their families.
Admiral Thomas Moorer, no less than Chair of the Joint Chief of Staff said,
The clampdown was not actually for security reasons but for domestic political reasons. I don’t think there is any question about it. What other reason could there have been? President Johnson was worried about the reaction of Jewish voters… I will never buy the idea that the pilots did not know this was an American ship. The attack was deliberate.[iii]
Dean Rusk, Secretary of State agreed, “I never accepted the Israeli explanation.”
Even if it was a mistake, which no one believes anymore, deliberately shooting up life rafts in the water of a ship in distress is a war crime. If it’s not, it should be. Yet, to this day, there has been no congressional investigation of the attack on the Liberty. Was Johnson afraid of Israel? Hardly. He was afraid of the ire of the American Jewish voting community and its lobby.
George Ball, former undersecretary of state wrote, “If America’s leaders did not have the courage to punish Israel for the blatant murder of American citizens, it seemed clear that their American friends would let them get away with almost anything.[iv]
That was in 1967. Little has changed. Last month, Stephen Zunes, professor of politics and chair of Middle Eastern Studies at the University of San Francisco charged:
The Obama administration appears to have given a green light to an Israeli attack on an unarmed flotilla, carrying peace and human rights activists – including a vessel with 50 Americans on board – bound for the besieged Gaza Strip. At a press conference on June 24, Secretary of State Hillary Clinton criticized the flotilla organized by the Free Gaza Campaign by saying it would “provoke actions by entering into Israeli waters and creating a situation in which the Israelis have the right to defend themselves.”[v]
Two questions need to be addressed; Since when did the entire Mediterranean become Israel’s waters and in what way does an unarmed humanitarian ship threaten any civilized nation? This effort is one of a series of flotilla seeking to deliver aid to Gaza. The previous one (May 13, 2010) resulted in a commando rid on the Mavi Marmara which killed nine people, including an American.
How can our elected officials be so blind to Israel? I remember our congress jumping up and down like a jack in the box, 29 times giving standing ovations to Benjamin Netanyahu. One can only imagine what President Obama could do for the American people and the hurting people of the world if congress would give that kind of support to him. And why does he not have that support? Does anyone think our politicians, who after being elected and sent to Washington to represent us, might be afraid of AIPAC, the American Jewish Committee, an anemic media and the Christian Right’s obsession with a wild haired end of the world scenario?
There are times when I wish the president would simply declare himself to be a one term president and do the things he knows are right and just. On the other hand, I realize that it would not just be his downfall, but many others in congress. Those who would be defeated in 2012 would be the very ones who in their hearts support the kind of peace through justice for which so many of us are working. Again, I would hate to be the president of the United States.
Thomas Are
August 5, 2011
[i] Some of those organization who have consistently condemned Israel for its abuse of the Palestinians would include: The International Court of Justice. Human Rights Watch, Amnesty International, B’Selem, International Red Cross, Save the Children, Doctors without Borders. and the United Nations Human Rights Council. In fact, I have read of no critic of Israel who after investigation became pro-Israel.
[ii] Norman Finkelstein, This Time We Went Too Far., (OR Books, New York, 2011) p.55.
[iii] Paul Findley, They Dare to Speak Out. (Lawrence Hill, New York., 1989) p. 179
[iv] James Scott, The Attack on the Liberty, Simon and Schuster, 2009.) p.287.
[v] Stephen Zunes, Washington Okays Attack on Unarmed U.S. Ship, Antiwar.com, July 2, 2011. As of July 19, 2011, The American Ship, The Audacity of Hope is being held up in Greece. Two other ships of the flotilla have been sabotaged and severely damaged.
Saturday, July 16, 2011
Dear Mr. President
On June 27th, forty-four outstanding Christian clergy, including Jimmy Allen, Ron Sider and Tony Campolo, wrote to President Obama supporting his “call for progress in bringing about an agreement to end the conflict between Israel and Palestine.” They expressed appreciation for his “important and helpful proposals concerning the issues of borders and security as a basis for negotiations.” They even asked for a “statement that addresses all final status issues, including the need for Jerusalem in the future to be the shared capital of both states, a just resolution to the issue of all refugees, and assured access for all faiths to their holy places.”
I appreciate their letter and commend them for writing it. It’s a letter that the president might actually get to read. However I wish they could have been more specific. They write, “There are of course other concerns, but they should not be allowed to interfere with making real progress toward an agreement on borders, security, Jerusalem and refugees”
Israel makes sure that Americans don’t forget what it feels like to be afraid of suicide bombers in the shopping mall, how much Israel is forced to invest in protecting its streets and guarding its citizens against suspicious characters. No one denies how hard it must be to live under such threat.
But what about the thousands who have been killed by Israeli planes, tanks and mortars, and those who die of ill health because of Israel’s blockade of food and medicine and those thousands more, including children, languishing in Israeli prisons?
History has shown that any president or politician who speaks out against such Israeli atrocities will suffer the loss of the Jewish vote and contributions. It’s not just that Obama might be a one term president; it will also mean the loss of numerous democratic seats in congress.
I wish the letter could have been more specific. I am not sure how much impact letters, or in fact any other statements, make when talking in generalities.
For instance, there is the specific matter of our ship, The Audacity of Hope, carrying American citizens currently being prevented from proceeding to Gaza with humanitarian aid. In fact, according to Stephen Zunes, professor of Politics and Chair of Middle Eastern Studies at the University of San Francisco:
The Obama administration appears to have given a green light to an Israeli attack on an unarmed flotilla carrying peace and human rights activists – including a vessel with 50 Americans on board – On June 24, Secretary of State Hillary Clinton criticized the flotilla organized by the Free Gaza Campaign by saying it would “provoke actions by entering into Israeli waters and creating a situation in which the Israelis have the right to defend themselves.”
Zunes goes on to say:
Clinton did not explain why a country had “the right to defend themselves” against ships which are clearly no threat.
The flotilla has been stopped in Greece and its passengers; doctors, writers, professors, political figures, clergy from various faith traditions and a holocaust survivor, plus nearly three thousand tons of supplies necessary to sustain life in Gaza have been held up. The captain of our American ship is now in jail and has yet to be visited by anyone from the U.S. Embassy.[1] Still, our president is silent. And who can blame him. The deck is stacked. Following last years attack on the Mavi Marmara in which Israeli commando killed nine unarmed humanitarian volunteers:
329 out of 435 members of the U.S. House of Representatives signed a letter that referred to Israel’s attack as an act of “self defense” which they “strongly support.” A Senate letter – signed by 87 out of 100 senators – went on record “fully supporting what it called Israel’s right to defend itself.”[2]
The American president must use stronger language than “unsustainable” in light of the fact that the United States has contributed billions of dollars every year to sustain Israel’s persecution of the Palestinians.
And how can any letter of concern to the president not mention the wall snaking down through the West Bank claiming the aquifers at Qalqilya on the Israel side, forcing 350,000 Palestinians to live in “the dead zone,” separated from their families, schools, hospital and farms. Then there is also the matter of continued destruction of Palestinian homes in East Jerusalem.
Isn’t it time to raise the question of harassment by illegal settlers living on Palestinian land who attack citizens, beat children on their way to and from school, and shoot holes in water tanks.
And surely it is time for our president to raise the question of Palestinian security. Hamas is a democratically elected government. It’s a cheap shot to just label them terrorist and do all that can be done to disempower them. It is time to acknowledge the “State terrorism.” of Israel which continues to kill Palestinians every month. If the president addresses these issues, maybe even the media would be forced to report them and maybe the president would gain the support of public opinion without which it seems even he becomes irrelevant.
Peace is an interesting and safe subject. Everyone supports peace. But what about justice, Mr. President? Fourteen hundred Palestinians were killed during Operation Cast Lead last winter and all the presidential candidates were silent. Nine humanitarian aid volunteers were cut down last May by Israeli commandoes including a nineteen year old American citizen and the White House remained silent. Israel’s continued blockade of Gaza leaves a million and a half people imprisoned in that overcrowded little walled in strip of land and the president says nothing.
It’s easy to say, let’s talk peace. It’s quite another to seek justice, without which there can be no peace.
Thomas Are
July 16, 2011
[1] Philip Weiss, US Flotilla Passengers Begin Fast at US Embassy in Athens, Mondoweiss, July 3, 2011.
[2] Stephen Zunes, Washington Okays Attack on Unarmed U.S. Ship. Foreign Policy in Focus. Paul Craig Roberts writes, “If there were ever any doubts, this dispels it. The U.S. government is the complete and total puppet of Israel.” (Email, June 30, 2011)
I appreciate their letter and commend them for writing it. It’s a letter that the president might actually get to read. However I wish they could have been more specific. They write, “There are of course other concerns, but they should not be allowed to interfere with making real progress toward an agreement on borders, security, Jerusalem and refugees”
Israel makes sure that Americans don’t forget what it feels like to be afraid of suicide bombers in the shopping mall, how much Israel is forced to invest in protecting its streets and guarding its citizens against suspicious characters. No one denies how hard it must be to live under such threat.
But what about the thousands who have been killed by Israeli planes, tanks and mortars, and those who die of ill health because of Israel’s blockade of food and medicine and those thousands more, including children, languishing in Israeli prisons?
History has shown that any president or politician who speaks out against such Israeli atrocities will suffer the loss of the Jewish vote and contributions. It’s not just that Obama might be a one term president; it will also mean the loss of numerous democratic seats in congress.
I wish the letter could have been more specific. I am not sure how much impact letters, or in fact any other statements, make when talking in generalities.
For instance, there is the specific matter of our ship, The Audacity of Hope, carrying American citizens currently being prevented from proceeding to Gaza with humanitarian aid. In fact, according to Stephen Zunes, professor of Politics and Chair of Middle Eastern Studies at the University of San Francisco:
The Obama administration appears to have given a green light to an Israeli attack on an unarmed flotilla carrying peace and human rights activists – including a vessel with 50 Americans on board – On June 24, Secretary of State Hillary Clinton criticized the flotilla organized by the Free Gaza Campaign by saying it would “provoke actions by entering into Israeli waters and creating a situation in which the Israelis have the right to defend themselves.”
Zunes goes on to say:
Clinton did not explain why a country had “the right to defend themselves” against ships which are clearly no threat.
The flotilla has been stopped in Greece and its passengers; doctors, writers, professors, political figures, clergy from various faith traditions and a holocaust survivor, plus nearly three thousand tons of supplies necessary to sustain life in Gaza have been held up. The captain of our American ship is now in jail and has yet to be visited by anyone from the U.S. Embassy.[1] Still, our president is silent. And who can blame him. The deck is stacked. Following last years attack on the Mavi Marmara in which Israeli commando killed nine unarmed humanitarian volunteers:
329 out of 435 members of the U.S. House of Representatives signed a letter that referred to Israel’s attack as an act of “self defense” which they “strongly support.” A Senate letter – signed by 87 out of 100 senators – went on record “fully supporting what it called Israel’s right to defend itself.”[2]
The American president must use stronger language than “unsustainable” in light of the fact that the United States has contributed billions of dollars every year to sustain Israel’s persecution of the Palestinians.
And how can any letter of concern to the president not mention the wall snaking down through the West Bank claiming the aquifers at Qalqilya on the Israel side, forcing 350,000 Palestinians to live in “the dead zone,” separated from their families, schools, hospital and farms. Then there is also the matter of continued destruction of Palestinian homes in East Jerusalem.
Isn’t it time to raise the question of harassment by illegal settlers living on Palestinian land who attack citizens, beat children on their way to and from school, and shoot holes in water tanks.
And surely it is time for our president to raise the question of Palestinian security. Hamas is a democratically elected government. It’s a cheap shot to just label them terrorist and do all that can be done to disempower them. It is time to acknowledge the “State terrorism.” of Israel which continues to kill Palestinians every month. If the president addresses these issues, maybe even the media would be forced to report them and maybe the president would gain the support of public opinion without which it seems even he becomes irrelevant.
Peace is an interesting and safe subject. Everyone supports peace. But what about justice, Mr. President? Fourteen hundred Palestinians were killed during Operation Cast Lead last winter and all the presidential candidates were silent. Nine humanitarian aid volunteers were cut down last May by Israeli commandoes including a nineteen year old American citizen and the White House remained silent. Israel’s continued blockade of Gaza leaves a million and a half people imprisoned in that overcrowded little walled in strip of land and the president says nothing.
It’s easy to say, let’s talk peace. It’s quite another to seek justice, without which there can be no peace.
Thomas Are
July 16, 2011
[1] Philip Weiss, US Flotilla Passengers Begin Fast at US Embassy in Athens, Mondoweiss, July 3, 2011.
[2] Stephen Zunes, Washington Okays Attack on Unarmed U.S. Ship. Foreign Policy in Focus. Paul Craig Roberts writes, “If there were ever any doubts, this dispels it. The U.S. government is the complete and total puppet of Israel.” (Email, June 30, 2011)
Wednesday, June 22, 2011
Historians Unknown to Larry
This week a friend who had read my blogs asked if I were making any headway with my Jewish friend, Larry. I answered that I do not expect to change Larry’s understanding of the Israel/Palestinian situation. After all, he is going to be slow to accept or believe anything I say. I am not Jewish. My only hope is that he might be influenced by the numerous Jewish authors, journalists and historians who are writing with more clarity and passion than I ever could. Larry shares their respect for the moral teachings of Judaism which I believe sooner or later will touch his conscience.
Of course, Larry has probably never heard of these courageous Jewish writers, but I can’t help but wonder how he would respond to them if he ever would read them. Would he think that they also needed to be enlightening?
Michael Lerner - - Editor of Tikkun
--- We call upon Jews in Israel and around the world to...adopt a stance of
open-hearted repentance for the unnecessary pain Israel has inflicted on the Palestinian people.[i]
--- Israel’s attempt to regain control by denying food to hundreds of thousands of men, women and children, by raiding homes and dragging out the their occupants in the middle of the night to stand for hours in the cold, by savagely beating a civilian population and breaking its bones — these activities are deplorable in any civilized human being.
--- Stop the beatings, stop the breaking of bones, the late night raids on people’s homes, stop using food as a weapon of war, stop pretending that you can respond to an entire people’s agony with guns and blows and power. Publically acknowledge that the Palestinians have the same right to national self-determination that we Jews have...”[ii]
Norman Finkelstein
---Yet by 1948 the Jew was able not only to “defend himself” but to commit massive atrocities as well. Indeed, according to the former director of the Israeli archives, “in almost every Arab village occupied by us during the War of Independence, acts were committed which are defined as war crimes, such as murder, massacres, and rapes.”[iii]
Joel Kavel
--- The Two State notion is essentially a code word for the maintenance of the status quo … More than a half-century of chewing and gnawing away at Palestinian land has left the latter more a rag-doll on a stick than the framework for a living social organism. Down to some 8 percent of the original territory, surrounded by the IDF, laced with Jewish-only roads, and peppered with hundreds of settlements that arrogate the water and best land, a dumping ground for Israeli waste, its fields and olive trees destroyed, its land carved up by the “apartheid wall,” the potential Palestinian state is no more than a bad joke… more aptly called a concentration camp than a state-in-waiting.[iv]
Ilan Peppe
--- Today, Israel could have security, normalization of relations, and integration into the region. But it very clearly prefers illegal expansion, conflict, and repeated exercise of violence, actions that are not only criminal, murderous, and destructive but are also eroding its long-term security.[v]
Marc Ellis
---has identified what he calls the myth of Jewish innocence … It has the effect of making only our suffering important and erasing that of others, even where the others’ suffering is caused by us. The interest of the Jews always occupy center stage; the experience or point of view of others is secondary.[vi]
Jeff Helper
--- As of 2009, more than 24,000 Palestinian homes have been destroyed – homes, we must add, of people who had already lost their homes inside Israel in 1948 and after.[vii]
---Some 350,000 Palestinians, trapped between the border and the wall, face impoverishment, alienation from their land and water, and eventual transfer. Entire cities like Qalqiliya and Tulkarm have been completely encircled.[viii]
Mark Braverman
--- You may not give out information about the abridgement of human rights in occupied Palestine, or talk about targeted assassinations, house demolitions, humiliating and life threatening restrictions on movement, or any other examples of Palestinian suffering, without presenting what is usually termed the “other side.” The “other side” is the recognition of the suffering of the Israelis, who are faced with terrorist attacks and the threat of annihilation… In my experience, the demand for “balance” is almost always made as a way to invalidate and neutralize scrutiny if those actions of Israel that are, in my view, the root cause of the threat to its own well-being and survival.[ix]
Larry’s conflict is not with me. It is not even with the Palestinians. His real conflict is with his own faith. There is no way that he can reconcile the teaching of the Jewish prophets with the conduct of the State of Israel.
I remember Marc Ellis saying that Jews today are in exactly the same spot where Christians were in the fourth century. Christians had to choose between the ethics and morality of their faith and the power of Constantine. He said that the Christians made the wrong choice then and we have not recovered yet. Jews today, he argues are having to choose between the ethics and morality of their faith and the power of the State of Israel. He cries when he sees so many of his fellow Jews making the wrong choice .
Thomas Are
June 22, 2011
[i].Michael Lerner, Healing: Israel/Palestine, (Tikkun Books, San Francisco, 2003) p. 137
[ii].Rosemary Radford Ruether and Marc Ellis, Beyond Occupation, (Beacon Press, Boston., 1990) p. 99-100.
[iii] Norman Finkelstein, Image and Reality of the Israel-Palestine Conflict. P.110.
[iv] Joel Kovel, Overcoming Zionism, (Pluto Press, London, 2007) p.216
[v] Norm Chomski and Ilan Peppe, Gaza in Crisis, p. 123.
[vi] Mark Braverman, Fatal Embrace. p.93.
[vii] Jeff Halper, Obstacles to Peace, p.46.
[viii] Ibid., p.38.
[ix] Mark Braverman, Fatal Embrace, p. 9.
Of course, Larry has probably never heard of these courageous Jewish writers, but I can’t help but wonder how he would respond to them if he ever would read them. Would he think that they also needed to be enlightening?
Michael Lerner - - Editor of Tikkun
--- We call upon Jews in Israel and around the world to...adopt a stance of
open-hearted repentance for the unnecessary pain Israel has inflicted on the Palestinian people.[i]
--- Israel’s attempt to regain control by denying food to hundreds of thousands of men, women and children, by raiding homes and dragging out the their occupants in the middle of the night to stand for hours in the cold, by savagely beating a civilian population and breaking its bones — these activities are deplorable in any civilized human being.
--- Stop the beatings, stop the breaking of bones, the late night raids on people’s homes, stop using food as a weapon of war, stop pretending that you can respond to an entire people’s agony with guns and blows and power. Publically acknowledge that the Palestinians have the same right to national self-determination that we Jews have...”[ii]
Norman Finkelstein
---Yet by 1948 the Jew was able not only to “defend himself” but to commit massive atrocities as well. Indeed, according to the former director of the Israeli archives, “in almost every Arab village occupied by us during the War of Independence, acts were committed which are defined as war crimes, such as murder, massacres, and rapes.”[iii]
Joel Kavel
--- The Two State notion is essentially a code word for the maintenance of the status quo … More than a half-century of chewing and gnawing away at Palestinian land has left the latter more a rag-doll on a stick than the framework for a living social organism. Down to some 8 percent of the original territory, surrounded by the IDF, laced with Jewish-only roads, and peppered with hundreds of settlements that arrogate the water and best land, a dumping ground for Israeli waste, its fields and olive trees destroyed, its land carved up by the “apartheid wall,” the potential Palestinian state is no more than a bad joke… more aptly called a concentration camp than a state-in-waiting.[iv]
Ilan Peppe
--- Today, Israel could have security, normalization of relations, and integration into the region. But it very clearly prefers illegal expansion, conflict, and repeated exercise of violence, actions that are not only criminal, murderous, and destructive but are also eroding its long-term security.[v]
Marc Ellis
---has identified what he calls the myth of Jewish innocence … It has the effect of making only our suffering important and erasing that of others, even where the others’ suffering is caused by us. The interest of the Jews always occupy center stage; the experience or point of view of others is secondary.[vi]
Jeff Helper
--- As of 2009, more than 24,000 Palestinian homes have been destroyed – homes, we must add, of people who had already lost their homes inside Israel in 1948 and after.[vii]
---Some 350,000 Palestinians, trapped between the border and the wall, face impoverishment, alienation from their land and water, and eventual transfer. Entire cities like Qalqiliya and Tulkarm have been completely encircled.[viii]
Mark Braverman
--- You may not give out information about the abridgement of human rights in occupied Palestine, or talk about targeted assassinations, house demolitions, humiliating and life threatening restrictions on movement, or any other examples of Palestinian suffering, without presenting what is usually termed the “other side.” The “other side” is the recognition of the suffering of the Israelis, who are faced with terrorist attacks and the threat of annihilation… In my experience, the demand for “balance” is almost always made as a way to invalidate and neutralize scrutiny if those actions of Israel that are, in my view, the root cause of the threat to its own well-being and survival.[ix]
Larry’s conflict is not with me. It is not even with the Palestinians. His real conflict is with his own faith. There is no way that he can reconcile the teaching of the Jewish prophets with the conduct of the State of Israel.
I remember Marc Ellis saying that Jews today are in exactly the same spot where Christians were in the fourth century. Christians had to choose between the ethics and morality of their faith and the power of Constantine. He said that the Christians made the wrong choice then and we have not recovered yet. Jews today, he argues are having to choose between the ethics and morality of their faith and the power of the State of Israel. He cries when he sees so many of his fellow Jews making the wrong choice .
Thomas Are
June 22, 2011
[i].Michael Lerner, Healing: Israel/Palestine, (Tikkun Books, San Francisco, 2003) p. 137
[ii].Rosemary Radford Ruether and Marc Ellis, Beyond Occupation, (Beacon Press, Boston., 1990) p. 99-100.
[iii] Norman Finkelstein, Image and Reality of the Israel-Palestine Conflict. P.110.
[iv] Joel Kovel, Overcoming Zionism, (Pluto Press, London, 2007) p.216
[v] Norm Chomski and Ilan Peppe, Gaza in Crisis, p. 123.
[vi] Mark Braverman, Fatal Embrace. p.93.
[vii] Jeff Halper, Obstacles to Peace, p.46.
[viii] Ibid., p.38.
[ix] Mark Braverman, Fatal Embrace, p. 9.
Monday, June 13, 2011
Larry's Six Day War Myth
On their way to church last Sunday (June 5th) in New York City, some friends of mine passed through a parade on Fifth Avenue. Thousands from the Jewish community, in fact more than 30,000 according to the New York Times, celebrated Israel’s expansionist war of 1967.
My Jewish friend Larry would have joined the march with pride. To him the war of 1967 proved not only Israel’s superior courage and valor, but also God’s endorsement of Israel’s occupation of the Sinai, West Bank, Golan Heights, Gaza and East Jerusalem. Larry sees the Six Day War as a “miracle” which established Israel as the dominant force in the Middle East. And it was all a gift from Nasser who gave Israel no choice but to defend itself. According to Larry’s article to our neighborhood paper, the taking of all this Arab land by force was justified because “Israel’s neighbors threatened Israel’s existence threatening to drive them into the sea.”
This is a myth and I have written about this previously and even listed the following quotes. I do not like repeating myself. However, this history needs to be known and repeated. Larry’s defense of the Six Day War is not only a distortion of the facts, his version is almost universally believed. I feel compelled to respond to it again.
One of the biggest myths imposed upon the American people is Larry’s claim that the Six Day War of 1967 was begun by Egypt and Israel only defended itself. But, not so according to some of Israel’s leaders:
Yitzhak Rabin - “I do not believe that Nasser wanted war. The two divisions he sent into Sinai on May 14 would not have been enough to unleash an offensive against Israel. He knew it and we knew it.”[i]
Mattiyahu Peled - Israeli General Staff - To pretend that the Egyptian forces massed on our frontiers were in a position to threaten the existence of Israel constitutes an insult not only to the intelligence of anyone capable of analyzing this sort of situation, but above all an insult to the Israeli Army.”[ii]
Mortecai Bentov - Israeli Cabinet - 1972 - “Israel’s “entire story” about the “dangers of extermination” was “invented” of whole cloth and exaggerated after the fact to justify the annexation of new Arab territories.” [iii]
Menachem Begin - 1982 - “The Egyptian army concentrated on the Sinai approaches do not prove that Nasser was really about to attack us. We must be honest with ourselves. We decided to attack him.” [iv]
Moshe Sharett - Former Prime Minister, years before the six Day War said- “Israeli political and military leadership never believed in any insuperable Arab dangers to Israel. They sought to maneuver and force Arab states into military confrontations which the Zionist leadership were certain of winning so Israel could carry out the destabilization of Arab regimes and the planned occupation of additional territory.”[v]
King Abdullah II of Jordan has been dealing with Israel’s aggression since he was five years old. I think he gets it just about right when he says:
One of Israel’s greatest talents has been exaggerating the threat posed by countries it considers strategic enemies, perpetrating the story of it being a tiny nation, surrounded by hostile powers. This myth has allowed the Israelis to portray their own calculated acts of aggression as self-defense and, in some cases, to persuade other nations to attack its enemies in its stead.[vi]
No sooner than Israel declared itself to be a state than its expansion goals were announced. When asked about borders, David Ben-Gurion said,
As for setting borders, it’s an open ended matter. In the Bible as well as in our history, there are all kinds of definitions of the countries borders. There is no real limit. No border is absolute. If it is a desert, it could just as well be the other side. If it is a sea, it could also be across the sea.[vii]
To this day, after 62 years of statehood, and 44 years of occupying Palestinian lands, Israel has yet to declare its borders. It seems obvious to anyone willing to see that 1967 was not a defensive war, but a part of a larger master plan to claim Arab lands. Either Larry knows something that all of these leaders of Israel missed, or the truth is just too hard for him. I guess its almost impossible to understand something if your self image is dependent upon your not understanding it.
Thomas Are
June 14, 2011
[i].Paul Finley, Deliberate Deceptions, Facing the Facts about the U.S., Israeli Relationship, (Lawrence Hill Books, Chicago,. 1993.) p. 36.
[ii]. Clifford A. Wright, Facts and Fables: The Arab-Israeli Conflict, (Kegan Paul International, New York, 1989.) p.132.
[iii].Paul Finley, Deliberate Deceptions, Facing the Facts about the U.S., Israeli Relationship, (Lawrence Hill Books, Chicago,. 1993.) p. 36.
[iv].Clifford A. Wright, Facts and Fables: The Arab-Israeli Conflict, (Kegan Paul International, New York, 1989.) p.132.
[v].Ralph Schoenman, The Hidden History of Zionism, (Veritas Press, Santa Barbara, California, 1988) p.59.
[vi] King Abdullah II, Our Last Best Chance, (Viking Penguin, 2011) p. 17
[vii].Knowledge Products audio Cassette on The Middle East, narrated by Harry Reasoner. 1991., (Carmichael and Carmichael, Nashville, Tennessee.)
My Jewish friend Larry would have joined the march with pride. To him the war of 1967 proved not only Israel’s superior courage and valor, but also God’s endorsement of Israel’s occupation of the Sinai, West Bank, Golan Heights, Gaza and East Jerusalem. Larry sees the Six Day War as a “miracle” which established Israel as the dominant force in the Middle East. And it was all a gift from Nasser who gave Israel no choice but to defend itself. According to Larry’s article to our neighborhood paper, the taking of all this Arab land by force was justified because “Israel’s neighbors threatened Israel’s existence threatening to drive them into the sea.”
This is a myth and I have written about this previously and even listed the following quotes. I do not like repeating myself. However, this history needs to be known and repeated. Larry’s defense of the Six Day War is not only a distortion of the facts, his version is almost universally believed. I feel compelled to respond to it again.
One of the biggest myths imposed upon the American people is Larry’s claim that the Six Day War of 1967 was begun by Egypt and Israel only defended itself. But, not so according to some of Israel’s leaders:
Yitzhak Rabin - “I do not believe that Nasser wanted war. The two divisions he sent into Sinai on May 14 would not have been enough to unleash an offensive against Israel. He knew it and we knew it.”[i]
Mattiyahu Peled - Israeli General Staff - To pretend that the Egyptian forces massed on our frontiers were in a position to threaten the existence of Israel constitutes an insult not only to the intelligence of anyone capable of analyzing this sort of situation, but above all an insult to the Israeli Army.”[ii]
Mortecai Bentov - Israeli Cabinet - 1972 - “Israel’s “entire story” about the “dangers of extermination” was “invented” of whole cloth and exaggerated after the fact to justify the annexation of new Arab territories.” [iii]
Menachem Begin - 1982 - “The Egyptian army concentrated on the Sinai approaches do not prove that Nasser was really about to attack us. We must be honest with ourselves. We decided to attack him.” [iv]
Moshe Sharett - Former Prime Minister, years before the six Day War said- “Israeli political and military leadership never believed in any insuperable Arab dangers to Israel. They sought to maneuver and force Arab states into military confrontations which the Zionist leadership were certain of winning so Israel could carry out the destabilization of Arab regimes and the planned occupation of additional territory.”[v]
King Abdullah II of Jordan has been dealing with Israel’s aggression since he was five years old. I think he gets it just about right when he says:
One of Israel’s greatest talents has been exaggerating the threat posed by countries it considers strategic enemies, perpetrating the story of it being a tiny nation, surrounded by hostile powers. This myth has allowed the Israelis to portray their own calculated acts of aggression as self-defense and, in some cases, to persuade other nations to attack its enemies in its stead.[vi]
No sooner than Israel declared itself to be a state than its expansion goals were announced. When asked about borders, David Ben-Gurion said,
As for setting borders, it’s an open ended matter. In the Bible as well as in our history, there are all kinds of definitions of the countries borders. There is no real limit. No border is absolute. If it is a desert, it could just as well be the other side. If it is a sea, it could also be across the sea.[vii]
To this day, after 62 years of statehood, and 44 years of occupying Palestinian lands, Israel has yet to declare its borders. It seems obvious to anyone willing to see that 1967 was not a defensive war, but a part of a larger master plan to claim Arab lands. Either Larry knows something that all of these leaders of Israel missed, or the truth is just too hard for him. I guess its almost impossible to understand something if your self image is dependent upon your not understanding it.
Thomas Are
June 14, 2011
[i].Paul Finley, Deliberate Deceptions, Facing the Facts about the U.S., Israeli Relationship, (Lawrence Hill Books, Chicago,. 1993.) p. 36.
[ii]. Clifford A. Wright, Facts and Fables: The Arab-Israeli Conflict, (Kegan Paul International, New York, 1989.) p.132.
[iii].Paul Finley, Deliberate Deceptions, Facing the Facts about the U.S., Israeli Relationship, (Lawrence Hill Books, Chicago,. 1993.) p. 36.
[iv].Clifford A. Wright, Facts and Fables: The Arab-Israeli Conflict, (Kegan Paul International, New York, 1989.) p.132.
[v].Ralph Schoenman, The Hidden History of Zionism, (Veritas Press, Santa Barbara, California, 1988) p.59.
[vi] King Abdullah II, Our Last Best Chance, (Viking Penguin, 2011) p. 17
[vii].Knowledge Products audio Cassette on The Middle East, narrated by Harry Reasoner. 1991., (Carmichael and Carmichael, Nashville, Tennessee.)
Thursday, June 9, 2011
Lunch with Larry
It’s been a while since my last blog , (Feb. 24th), but I have not retired from the cause. Last January, I taught a four weeks class using Steadfast Hope, an excellent study of the Israel/Palestine issue published by the Presbyterian Church.
I share this as a lead in to a challenge I received from a Jewish neighbor who was “shocked” at the report of my class because he found it to be “much misleading and inaccurate from a factual and historical point of view. I think it is you who needs to be enlightened and have a wake up call,” he wrote. He submitted a long criticism of my position to the neighborhood paper for publication. However, he offered to meet with me one on one that he might “enlighten” me. I immediately contacted him for a lunch and we finally got together this past week.
Larry is a very likable and devoted Jew, committed to the Torah and to the State of Israel. I am grateful for the time I had with him. However, I found his knowledge of Israel’s history somewhat lacking. He built his case on three arguments. Most of all, “God gave that land to the Jews and the Arabs should accept the will of God and get out.” He also declared that Jews are smart and therefore Israel is an intelligent and moral nation, the only democracy in the Middle East with the most moral army on the globe. Finally, Larry lifted up the suffering of Jews as a justification for anything Israel wanted to do. I came to believe that the only way Larry could reconcile his respect for the teachings of the prophets with the actions of Israel over the past 64 years is to deliberately avoid knowing or believe the “stories” of Israel’s treatment of the Palestinians.
Larry is unaware of, or will not admit knowing about, the ethnic cleansing of 1948. He believes the Six Day War of 1967 was the work of Nasser. And he justifies the wall by saying it stopped suicide bombers, but he had no interest in the route of the wall or the pain it causes Palestinians. He feels that settlements simply need to be negotiated, keeping in mind that Samaria and Judea were given to the Jews by God. He admires Netanyahu and cannot understand why Presbyterians would be picking on Israel. I hope I have not misrepresented Larry. I did like him. However, in my next few blogs, I will respond to Larry, but I will address only his written article, not our private conversation. The words in bold print are his words.
Larry wrote, there has “never been a country of Palestine ruled or governed by Palestinians; in fact there has never been a Palestinian people per se.”
I say, not so. In fact, there is a Palestinian people now, governed by Palestinians. I have met Palestinians who proudly presented their Palestinian passports. They were issued by Jordan but they were passports of Palestinian citizens, not Jordanians. But let’s suppose Larry is right. Just because the Palestinians had no government to protect them, would that give Israel the right to kill, destroy homes, steal water, imprison and exile because they were “not a people?” Larry is echoing what Golda Meir said, “It’s not as though we came in and drove them out and took their land, they did not exist.”[1] On page 160 of Jeff Sharlet’s The Family, he writes about the efforts of Germans to forget what they had allowed to happen during the war.
In Nuremberg, a little girl asked her mother where the Jews of “Jew Street” are. Hush, There are none, darling, there never were.
How hard it must be for those who have been oppressed for so long to admit that they have now become the oppressors.
The point is, Palestinians are human beings who share this planet with the rest of us. They work, educate and feed their children. They love and respect the rights of others, like all civilized people do, and they worship God
Larry proudly pointed out that “Israel was the first country on the ground in Haiti after last years earthquake." I agree, and this was Israel at its best.
However, Larry was shocked to learn that without much fanfare, the Palestinians in Gaza, because of their religion, and out of their poverty, took offerings for the people of Haiti
At the same time, Israel did not respond to the “earthquake” caused by Israel right next door in Gaza during December-January 2009. Rather Israel bombed hospitals, schools, sewage plants and community centers, destroying 22,000 buildings. Israel called it a war. Over 1400 Palestinians were killed, mostly women and children. Israel lost 13, six by friendly fire. Israel did drop leaflets warning Palestinians to get out. But all the exit routes were closed by Israel. Where was a mother and her small children supposed to go to be safe?
There were no medical teams like those sent to Haiti. Rather, Israel enforced a barricade blocking out fuel, food, and medicine. This closure remains in effect until this day.
None of this was acknowledged by Larry who still insisted that Israel is the most moral nation on the globe.
More response to Larry in my next blog.
Thomas Are
June 9, 2011
[1] There are numerous sources for this quote. I read it first in Naim Ateek’s, Justice and Only Justice, (Maryknoll, New York, Orbis Books, 1989). p. 36
I share this as a lead in to a challenge I received from a Jewish neighbor who was “shocked” at the report of my class because he found it to be “much misleading and inaccurate from a factual and historical point of view. I think it is you who needs to be enlightened and have a wake up call,” he wrote. He submitted a long criticism of my position to the neighborhood paper for publication. However, he offered to meet with me one on one that he might “enlighten” me. I immediately contacted him for a lunch and we finally got together this past week.
Larry is a very likable and devoted Jew, committed to the Torah and to the State of Israel. I am grateful for the time I had with him. However, I found his knowledge of Israel’s history somewhat lacking. He built his case on three arguments. Most of all, “God gave that land to the Jews and the Arabs should accept the will of God and get out.” He also declared that Jews are smart and therefore Israel is an intelligent and moral nation, the only democracy in the Middle East with the most moral army on the globe. Finally, Larry lifted up the suffering of Jews as a justification for anything Israel wanted to do. I came to believe that the only way Larry could reconcile his respect for the teachings of the prophets with the actions of Israel over the past 64 years is to deliberately avoid knowing or believe the “stories” of Israel’s treatment of the Palestinians.
Larry is unaware of, or will not admit knowing about, the ethnic cleansing of 1948. He believes the Six Day War of 1967 was the work of Nasser. And he justifies the wall by saying it stopped suicide bombers, but he had no interest in the route of the wall or the pain it causes Palestinians. He feels that settlements simply need to be negotiated, keeping in mind that Samaria and Judea were given to the Jews by God. He admires Netanyahu and cannot understand why Presbyterians would be picking on Israel. I hope I have not misrepresented Larry. I did like him. However, in my next few blogs, I will respond to Larry, but I will address only his written article, not our private conversation. The words in bold print are his words.
Larry wrote, there has “never been a country of Palestine ruled or governed by Palestinians; in fact there has never been a Palestinian people per se.”
I say, not so. In fact, there is a Palestinian people now, governed by Palestinians. I have met Palestinians who proudly presented their Palestinian passports. They were issued by Jordan but they were passports of Palestinian citizens, not Jordanians. But let’s suppose Larry is right. Just because the Palestinians had no government to protect them, would that give Israel the right to kill, destroy homes, steal water, imprison and exile because they were “not a people?” Larry is echoing what Golda Meir said, “It’s not as though we came in and drove them out and took their land, they did not exist.”[1] On page 160 of Jeff Sharlet’s The Family, he writes about the efforts of Germans to forget what they had allowed to happen during the war.
In Nuremberg, a little girl asked her mother where the Jews of “Jew Street” are. Hush, There are none, darling, there never were.
How hard it must be for those who have been oppressed for so long to admit that they have now become the oppressors.
The point is, Palestinians are human beings who share this planet with the rest of us. They work, educate and feed their children. They love and respect the rights of others, like all civilized people do, and they worship God
Larry proudly pointed out that “Israel was the first country on the ground in Haiti after last years earthquake." I agree, and this was Israel at its best.
However, Larry was shocked to learn that without much fanfare, the Palestinians in Gaza, because of their religion, and out of their poverty, took offerings for the people of Haiti
At the same time, Israel did not respond to the “earthquake” caused by Israel right next door in Gaza during December-January 2009. Rather Israel bombed hospitals, schools, sewage plants and community centers, destroying 22,000 buildings. Israel called it a war. Over 1400 Palestinians were killed, mostly women and children. Israel lost 13, six by friendly fire. Israel did drop leaflets warning Palestinians to get out. But all the exit routes were closed by Israel. Where was a mother and her small children supposed to go to be safe?
There were no medical teams like those sent to Haiti. Rather, Israel enforced a barricade blocking out fuel, food, and medicine. This closure remains in effect until this day.
None of this was acknowledged by Larry who still insisted that Israel is the most moral nation on the globe.
More response to Larry in my next blog.
Thomas Are
June 9, 2011
[1] There are numerous sources for this quote. I read it first in Naim Ateek’s, Justice and Only Justice, (Maryknoll, New York, Orbis Books, 1989). p. 36
Thursday, February 24, 2011
U.S. VETOS U.N. RESOLUTION YET AGAIN, AND STILL ALONE
Susan Rice, Ambassador to the UN wants to be clear. She defended her veto of the UN Security Council resolution calling for Israel to stop the building of settlements by saying, “Our opposition to the resolution before this Council today should not be misunderstood to mean that we support settlement activity. On the contrary, we reject in the strongest terms the legitimacy of continued Israeli settlement activity.” She went on to stress, “that the Obama administration agreed with the resolution’s sponsors but had to oppose it for political reasons.” All fourteen other members of the Council backed the resolution. “Our goal is to bring the sides back to the negotiating table.” She explained
Sounds noble, but with what do the Palestinians have to negotiate? Israel’s military might has already taken everything it wants; land, water, control of Palestinian borders, freedom and dignity.
With what would I have to negotiate when the neighborhood thug takes over my house, occupies every room and forces me to live in the garage? Even when the police come, he continues stealing everything he wants. I find little comfort when the cops say, “We are not going to stop his thieving, even as he hauls away the stuff in your garage. We want you to sit down, make peace and negotiate.” All my other neighbors are beside themselves in the shadow of this bully. After all, they could be next. They protest in the streets and call the sheriff. But, nothing happens. The thug makes huge reelection contributions to the sheriff. So, he says, “I think it is best to just let them talk it out.”
Back to today’s situation. It happens over and over and over again. The United States first used its veto power over the United Nations Security Council on behalf of Israel in 1973. Since then, whether it concerns a condemnation of the assassination of Ahmed Yassin, the leader of Hamas, or objecting to the construction of the apartheid wall or the killing by Israeli forces of United Nations personnel, the US has covered Israel’s guilt forty one times with its veto power.[1] Since the attack on the USS Liberty in 1967, Israel has known that it can do anything it wants without a word of condemnation from the US government.
As the world declares the settlements “illegal,” the strongest language coming out of the US government is “We are deeply disappointed by the announcement. (of new settlements). State Department spokesman Philip J. Crowley found it “counterproductive.” (Whatever that means.) Hillary Clinton said that the settlements were not “illegal,” but simply “illegitimate.” All the while, she “reiterated America’s unshakable commitment to Israel,” and in an 8-hour session with Netanyahu, they reached a tentative agreement that slowed, but did not stop, further settlement expansion.”
In exchange for a mere 90-day “partial” halt, the U.S. would provide Israel with $3 billion worth of F-25 attack jets, make no further demands for a settlement freeze and veto all U.N. resolutions critical of Israel as well as any attempt by the Palestinians to gain U.N. support for a declaration of statehood. Israel will therefore receive a payoff of $1 billion a month for the brief three months it refrains from building more settlements – money that might have been spent putting Americans back to work, rebuilding roads and bridges, caring for the elderly, poor or reducing class size in cash-strapped school districts.
A significant provision of the agreement excludes East Jerusalem from the proposed freeze, giving Israel a free hand to continue replacing the Arab population with Jews….[2]
How long will the citizens of the US look the other way while our “AIPAC bought” politicians continue to do the wrong thing? We talk about being on the side of freedom and self determination but seldom speak of what we are doing to the Palestinians.
So far, the street demonstrations in the Middle East seems to be focused on their internal economic suffering. But both the US and Israel must be asking for how long.
Fahed Abu Akel, past moderator of the Presbyterian Church USA, warns:
The journey to end the Israeli military occupation over the lives of 4 million Palestinians in the West Bank and East Jerusalem and Gaza is very long. We need to be clear that our work is in the USA not in Israel or Palestine. We must end the AIPAC occupation over our International policy. The advisors to our president must be on drugs and must be crazy. After what is taking place in Tunis, Egypt and what is going to be in other Arab countries in the near future - our action in the UN is 50 years behind history and we are acting like a colonial power who wants to protect what is wrong in day light. This action at the UN is going to play against our interest all over the Arab and Muslim world.
Israel has made clear that it will not stop building settlements on Palestinian land. Period.
The U.S. has made clear that it will say…What? … Well, Nothing. and Palestinians will continue to be forced from their homes for Jewish only settlements.
Thomas Are
February 24, 2011
[1] Report of the Middle East Study Committee to the 219th General Assembly (2010) of the Presbyterian Church, (U.S.A.) Breaking Down the Walls, p.103.
[2] Rachelle Marshall, U.S. Elections Mean a Big Win for the Israeli Right, The Washington Report on Middle East Affairs, January/February 2011, p.9.
Sounds noble, but with what do the Palestinians have to negotiate? Israel’s military might has already taken everything it wants; land, water, control of Palestinian borders, freedom and dignity.
With what would I have to negotiate when the neighborhood thug takes over my house, occupies every room and forces me to live in the garage? Even when the police come, he continues stealing everything he wants. I find little comfort when the cops say, “We are not going to stop his thieving, even as he hauls away the stuff in your garage. We want you to sit down, make peace and negotiate.” All my other neighbors are beside themselves in the shadow of this bully. After all, they could be next. They protest in the streets and call the sheriff. But, nothing happens. The thug makes huge reelection contributions to the sheriff. So, he says, “I think it is best to just let them talk it out.”
Back to today’s situation. It happens over and over and over again. The United States first used its veto power over the United Nations Security Council on behalf of Israel in 1973. Since then, whether it concerns a condemnation of the assassination of Ahmed Yassin, the leader of Hamas, or objecting to the construction of the apartheid wall or the killing by Israeli forces of United Nations personnel, the US has covered Israel’s guilt forty one times with its veto power.[1] Since the attack on the USS Liberty in 1967, Israel has known that it can do anything it wants without a word of condemnation from the US government.
As the world declares the settlements “illegal,” the strongest language coming out of the US government is “We are deeply disappointed by the announcement. (of new settlements). State Department spokesman Philip J. Crowley found it “counterproductive.” (Whatever that means.) Hillary Clinton said that the settlements were not “illegal,” but simply “illegitimate.” All the while, she “reiterated America’s unshakable commitment to Israel,” and in an 8-hour session with Netanyahu, they reached a tentative agreement that slowed, but did not stop, further settlement expansion.”
In exchange for a mere 90-day “partial” halt, the U.S. would provide Israel with $3 billion worth of F-25 attack jets, make no further demands for a settlement freeze and veto all U.N. resolutions critical of Israel as well as any attempt by the Palestinians to gain U.N. support for a declaration of statehood. Israel will therefore receive a payoff of $1 billion a month for the brief three months it refrains from building more settlements – money that might have been spent putting Americans back to work, rebuilding roads and bridges, caring for the elderly, poor or reducing class size in cash-strapped school districts.
A significant provision of the agreement excludes East Jerusalem from the proposed freeze, giving Israel a free hand to continue replacing the Arab population with Jews….[2]
How long will the citizens of the US look the other way while our “AIPAC bought” politicians continue to do the wrong thing? We talk about being on the side of freedom and self determination but seldom speak of what we are doing to the Palestinians.
So far, the street demonstrations in the Middle East seems to be focused on their internal economic suffering. But both the US and Israel must be asking for how long.
Fahed Abu Akel, past moderator of the Presbyterian Church USA, warns:
The journey to end the Israeli military occupation over the lives of 4 million Palestinians in the West Bank and East Jerusalem and Gaza is very long. We need to be clear that our work is in the USA not in Israel or Palestine. We must end the AIPAC occupation over our International policy. The advisors to our president must be on drugs and must be crazy. After what is taking place in Tunis, Egypt and what is going to be in other Arab countries in the near future - our action in the UN is 50 years behind history and we are acting like a colonial power who wants to protect what is wrong in day light. This action at the UN is going to play against our interest all over the Arab and Muslim world.
Israel has made clear that it will not stop building settlements on Palestinian land. Period.
The U.S. has made clear that it will say…What? … Well, Nothing. and Palestinians will continue to be forced from their homes for Jewish only settlements.
Thomas Are
February 24, 2011
[1] Report of the Middle East Study Committee to the 219th General Assembly (2010) of the Presbyterian Church, (U.S.A.) Breaking Down the Walls, p.103.
[2] Rachelle Marshall, U.S. Elections Mean a Big Win for the Israeli Right, The Washington Report on Middle East Affairs, January/February 2011, p.9.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
