“We had no choice,” explained Sen. Robert Wexler. “We had to cut the funds from UNESCO. They accepted Palestine as a member and the U.S. has a twenty year old law that denies funding to any UN agency that recognizes Palestine.”[1] The United Nations Economic, Scientific, and Cultural Organization’s (UNESCO) mission statement includes the building of peace and the alleviation of poverty. But, we had no choice, Wexler said, because we are the good guys and we want what is best for Israel and Palestine. Our responsibility is to force them to meet and negotiate their differences without outside interference.
So, we cut our $60 million pledge to an organization that seeks water for 950,000 refugees, promotes education in South Sudan, provides relief to tsunami victims and is teaching 3000 Afghan soldiers to read.
Peace talks between Israel and Palestine have been going on for more than 20 years and the sides are further apart now than they have ever been. Israel brings preconditions to the table, such as; existing settlements will become permanent parts of Israel,
As the year ended, plans were going ahead for 3,690 new apartments in East Jerusalem and 1000 in nearby settlements. Peace Now reported a 20 percent increase in settlement construction in 2011, with 1,850 new units going up in settlements east of the separation wall, and 3,500 elsewhere in the West Bank. Human Rights groups noted a corresponding increase in home demolitions in the West Bank and East Jerusalem.
Palestinians not only have settlements on their land, they have to deal with settlers who harass, intimidate, steal and seem to have no limits to their brutally.
In late December, a coalition of human rights groups including Human Rights Watch and Amnesty International, reported that during 2011 settlers destroyed hundreds of homes, water wells and farm structures, as well as 10,000 olive trees.[2]
Another precondition demanded by Israel; The separation wall will become the new border, encircling West Bank’s valuable water aquifers and more than 40,000 acres of its prime agricultural land, enclosing another 10 percent of Palestine pushing the Palestinians back onto 12 percent of what used to be their home land instead of the 22 percent they are asking for. What is left is cut up by Jewish only roads.
Now the Israeli government declares war on solar panels which provide the only electricity for many Palestinian villages. Others, more fortunate, may purchase electricity, at inflated rates, from Israel.[3] It seems that Israel is saying to the Palestinians that your land is ours, your water is ours, your agriculture is ours, your homes are ours and now, even your sunshine belongs to us.
Still, our politicians declare Hamas as the enemy of peace.
Thomas Are
March 22, 2011.
[1] Interview with John Oliver, Daily Show, 3/15/12.
[2] See Rachelle Marshall, Israel’s Current Demand: Most of the West Bank., The Washington Report on Middle East Affairs, March, 2012, p.8-9.
[3] Phoebe Greenwood, Palestinians Prepare to Lose the Solar Panels that Provide a Lifeline. The Guardian, Wednesday, March 14, 2012
Friday, March 23, 2012
Friday, March 16, 2012
The Spear Head of Justice
Gilad Atzmon writes:
The lack of capacity to reflect upon oneself from the futuristic perspective, explains the Israeli collective complicity in some of their horrendous war crimes. This should be enough to explain why the Israelis sliced up the Holy Land with separation walls and barbed wires. It explains why Israelis drop White Phosphorous on their next door neighbors as they seek shelter in a UN shelter. It also explains why Israeli Navy Seal commandos ended up executing peace activist on the Mavi Marmara on the high seas. It also explains why newly-born Israel was quick to expel the vast majority of the Palestinian indigenous population just three years after the liberation of Auschwitz… People who defy history never look in the mirror.[1]
I heard Gilad Aztmon speak in Atlanta just last week. (3/10/12) He shared with us how his grandfather had been a prominent commander of the Irgun, the terrorist gang involved in the massacre of Deir Yassin. Grandfather was also, according to Gilad, “pretty cross with the Palestinians for dwelling on the land he was sure belonged to him and his people, given to them by God.” Gilad grew up believing "it was only Jews who were associated with anything good.”[2] The greatest thing that he could do with his life was to become a martyr for Israel. Then in 1982, at 18 years old, he joined the army and was sent to Lebanon where he first encountered Palestinians. His illusions crumbled, “I knew that our leaders were lying, in fact, every Israeli soldier understood that this was a war of Israeli aggression.”
Atzmon is not very different from many other Jewish celebrities, (he is a world renowned saxophonist.) but the passion with which he spoke of justice for the Palestinians amazed me. He said something like, ‘The point of the spear for international justice is focused on how Israel treats the Palestinians.’
I sat there thinking, how right he is. If we can’t see the daily injustice inflicted on the Palestinians then what chance is there for justice anywhere? We might as well give up to a dog eat dog world, every man (and nation) for himself and to hell with the needs and pains of anyone else. The injustice in Palestine is so obvious:
Palestinian children face many obstacles:
*** 10 percent of children in the West Bank and Gaza Strip suffer from chronic malnutrition.
*** 19 percent of children under 5 are anemic
*** 23 percent of Palestinian families with children are in poverty ($2 a day or less.)
*** 25 percent of Palestinian children do not attend primary school.[3]
That’s not the worst of it.
In the last two days, Israeli forces have killed at least 15 residents of the Gaza Strip and wounded over 30. Among the dead are two young boys.[4]
If Gilad Atzmon has the moral courage to speak out against his own heritage, family and nation, can we not at least learn about the issue, speak out in our churches, inform our friends and write our politicians?
Thomas Are
March 16, 2012.
[1] Gilad Atzmon, The Wandering Who, (Zero Books) p. 181-182.
[2] Ibid., p.2
[3] Sources UN, PCBS, cited in Washington Report on Middle East Affairs, March 2012. p.2
[4] Max Blumenthal, Israel’s Bogus Case for Bombing Gaza Obscures Political Motives, Mondowweiss, March 11, 2012.
The lack of capacity to reflect upon oneself from the futuristic perspective, explains the Israeli collective complicity in some of their horrendous war crimes. This should be enough to explain why the Israelis sliced up the Holy Land with separation walls and barbed wires. It explains why Israelis drop White Phosphorous on their next door neighbors as they seek shelter in a UN shelter. It also explains why Israeli Navy Seal commandos ended up executing peace activist on the Mavi Marmara on the high seas. It also explains why newly-born Israel was quick to expel the vast majority of the Palestinian indigenous population just three years after the liberation of Auschwitz… People who defy history never look in the mirror.[1]
I heard Gilad Aztmon speak in Atlanta just last week. (3/10/12) He shared with us how his grandfather had been a prominent commander of the Irgun, the terrorist gang involved in the massacre of Deir Yassin. Grandfather was also, according to Gilad, “pretty cross with the Palestinians for dwelling on the land he was sure belonged to him and his people, given to them by God.” Gilad grew up believing "it was only Jews who were associated with anything good.”[2] The greatest thing that he could do with his life was to become a martyr for Israel. Then in 1982, at 18 years old, he joined the army and was sent to Lebanon where he first encountered Palestinians. His illusions crumbled, “I knew that our leaders were lying, in fact, every Israeli soldier understood that this was a war of Israeli aggression.”
Atzmon is not very different from many other Jewish celebrities, (he is a world renowned saxophonist.) but the passion with which he spoke of justice for the Palestinians amazed me. He said something like, ‘The point of the spear for international justice is focused on how Israel treats the Palestinians.’
I sat there thinking, how right he is. If we can’t see the daily injustice inflicted on the Palestinians then what chance is there for justice anywhere? We might as well give up to a dog eat dog world, every man (and nation) for himself and to hell with the needs and pains of anyone else. The injustice in Palestine is so obvious:
Palestinian children face many obstacles:
*** 10 percent of children in the West Bank and Gaza Strip suffer from chronic malnutrition.
*** 19 percent of children under 5 are anemic
*** 23 percent of Palestinian families with children are in poverty ($2 a day or less.)
*** 25 percent of Palestinian children do not attend primary school.[3]
That’s not the worst of it.
In the last two days, Israeli forces have killed at least 15 residents of the Gaza Strip and wounded over 30. Among the dead are two young boys.[4]
If Gilad Atzmon has the moral courage to speak out against his own heritage, family and nation, can we not at least learn about the issue, speak out in our churches, inform our friends and write our politicians?
Thomas Are
March 16, 2012.
[1] Gilad Atzmon, The Wandering Who, (Zero Books) p. 181-182.
[2] Ibid., p.2
[3] Sources UN, PCBS, cited in Washington Report on Middle East Affairs, March 2012. p.2
[4] Max Blumenthal, Israel’s Bogus Case for Bombing Gaza Obscures Political Motives, Mondowweiss, March 11, 2012.
Thursday, March 8, 2012
An Act of War
Two years ago I blogged:[1]
Does anyone think that we, or Israel can drop bombs on Iran, dust off our hands and come home declaring “Mission Accomplished,” and think that will be the end of it? If we, or more likely Israel, attack Iran, it’s a whole new war. We can’t get out of the ones we are already in. Even after five years, 4000 of our troops dead, 30,000 wounded, many of them injured for life, a half trillion dollars down the tube… and that’s against a nation whose military had been broken by U.S. victories in 1991 followed by ten years of bombings and sanctions.
It is easier said than done. To bomb Iran, Israel would have to fly over a thousand miles of hostile air space, refuel in the air and hit numerous targets at the same time. The worse part is that Israel does not have the bunker buster bombs which would be required to knock out the estimated 12 to 20 facilities built into the side of a mountain and heavily fortified. Israel would have to get them from the US. Automatically such an attack would be an act of war and we would be right in the midst of it for God only knows for how long.
It’s easy for political hopefuls to talk about a “line in the sand,” and all options being on the table. But has anyone asked the next question. I keep waiting for the news media to ask, “After we have bombed their plants and killed no telling how many people, what happens next?” Iran has 70 million people, missiles capable of sinking ships, an army of over 850,000 troops, 1600 tanks, 21,000 armored vehicles, 70 warships and 3 submarines.[2] I hope somebody is counting the cost this time.
Another question is, “What will Iran do with a nuclear bomb even if it has one.” To use it would invite a retaliation that would pulverize its nation. Eric Margolis writes,
The US Congress pulsates with war fever, fuelled by oncoming elections and huge cash donations. North America’s media pounds the war drums.” Why would Iran risk nuclear vaporization by Israel or the US just to launch a small number of its inaccurate missiles at Israel? US and Israeli early warning satellites would spot any Iranian missiles at launch and bring down a nuclear holocaust on the Islamic Republic.
It’s hard for me to think that Israel actually fears a nuclear attack. What Israel does fear is Iran’s support of Hezbollah and Hamas, which are the two organizations interfering with Israeli’s ambitions to destroy the Palestinians and take their land.
The best way for Israel to gain security would be to bring a just end to the Palestinian crisis. Do we risk a long time war, with missiles, terror retaliations and unprecedented oil prices to protect Israel’s expansion into Palestine?
Thomas Are
March 9, 20112
[1] September 7, 2008
[2] Eric Margolis, Politicians Want War With Iran, LewRockwell.com, February 8, 2012.
Does anyone think that we, or Israel can drop bombs on Iran, dust off our hands and come home declaring “Mission Accomplished,” and think that will be the end of it? If we, or more likely Israel, attack Iran, it’s a whole new war. We can’t get out of the ones we are already in. Even after five years, 4000 of our troops dead, 30,000 wounded, many of them injured for life, a half trillion dollars down the tube… and that’s against a nation whose military had been broken by U.S. victories in 1991 followed by ten years of bombings and sanctions.
It is easier said than done. To bomb Iran, Israel would have to fly over a thousand miles of hostile air space, refuel in the air and hit numerous targets at the same time. The worse part is that Israel does not have the bunker buster bombs which would be required to knock out the estimated 12 to 20 facilities built into the side of a mountain and heavily fortified. Israel would have to get them from the US. Automatically such an attack would be an act of war and we would be right in the midst of it for God only knows for how long.
It’s easy for political hopefuls to talk about a “line in the sand,” and all options being on the table. But has anyone asked the next question. I keep waiting for the news media to ask, “After we have bombed their plants and killed no telling how many people, what happens next?” Iran has 70 million people, missiles capable of sinking ships, an army of over 850,000 troops, 1600 tanks, 21,000 armored vehicles, 70 warships and 3 submarines.[2] I hope somebody is counting the cost this time.
Another question is, “What will Iran do with a nuclear bomb even if it has one.” To use it would invite a retaliation that would pulverize its nation. Eric Margolis writes,
The US Congress pulsates with war fever, fuelled by oncoming elections and huge cash donations. North America’s media pounds the war drums.” Why would Iran risk nuclear vaporization by Israel or the US just to launch a small number of its inaccurate missiles at Israel? US and Israeli early warning satellites would spot any Iranian missiles at launch and bring down a nuclear holocaust on the Islamic Republic.
It’s hard for me to think that Israel actually fears a nuclear attack. What Israel does fear is Iran’s support of Hezbollah and Hamas, which are the two organizations interfering with Israeli’s ambitions to destroy the Palestinians and take their land.
The best way for Israel to gain security would be to bring a just end to the Palestinian crisis. Do we risk a long time war, with missiles, terror retaliations and unprecedented oil prices to protect Israel’s expansion into Palestine?
Thomas Are
March 9, 20112
[1] September 7, 2008
[2] Eric Margolis, Politicians Want War With Iran, LewRockwell.com, February 8, 2012.
Tuesday, February 28, 2012
Obama's Apology
The question is, what would Newt do? He is clear that to apologize to the Muslim world is “astonishing” and embarrassing, or any other word he can think of to belittle the actions of Barack Obama. But, what would Newt do?
If apologizing to those who already see us as arrogant, at war with Islam and occupying their country will lead to one more step toward peace and understanding with Islam, then I, for one, am glad to have a president big enough to say, “I am sorry for what happened.” Being sorry does not mean that we were all wrong or that they are all right. It simply means, let’s try for a better relationship.
One thing has been demonstrated without question. Violence only produces more violence. Are we not getting tired of war after war trying to force other people to do it our way? What does it hurt to try something new? The president’s apology did not cause the death of Americans but it may have prevented more bloodshed. There is no way to know. What we do know, is that his apology strengthened the hands of those millions of moderate Muslims who are pleading for peace and a better expression of Islam.
Newt wants to come across as a military tough guy, but he sounds more like a moral mosquito. If what we want most in the next decade is more and more violence, any president can provide that, even start a war. It takes leadership to prevent one.
Thomas Are
February 28, 2012
If apologizing to those who already see us as arrogant, at war with Islam and occupying their country will lead to one more step toward peace and understanding with Islam, then I, for one, am glad to have a president big enough to say, “I am sorry for what happened.” Being sorry does not mean that we were all wrong or that they are all right. It simply means, let’s try for a better relationship.
One thing has been demonstrated without question. Violence only produces more violence. Are we not getting tired of war after war trying to force other people to do it our way? What does it hurt to try something new? The president’s apology did not cause the death of Americans but it may have prevented more bloodshed. There is no way to know. What we do know, is that his apology strengthened the hands of those millions of moderate Muslims who are pleading for peace and a better expression of Islam.
Newt wants to come across as a military tough guy, but he sounds more like a moral mosquito. If what we want most in the next decade is more and more violence, any president can provide that, even start a war. It takes leadership to prevent one.
Thomas Are
February 28, 2012
Wednesday, February 8, 2012
Is It Moral to Murder?
My lands, have we come to that? A national magazine’s cover story feature is entitled, IS IT MORAL TO KILL IRAN’S SCIENTISTS?
When Hamas does it, it is terrorism. When Hezbollah does it, it’s terrorism,” said Tod Robberson in The Dallas Morning News. So presumably, it was also an act of terrorism last week when two men on a motorcycle raced through morning rush hour traffic in the streets of Tehran and stuck a magnet bomb to a car carrying Mostafa Ahmadi Roshan, deputy director of Iran’s nuclear enrichment plant. Roshan, 32 was killed, along with his bodyguard, becoming the fifth Iranian nuclear scientist to die a violent, mysterious death in recent years. No one doubts that Israel’s Mossad is behind these sophisticated assassinations, probably with U.S. help.[1]
Do we have to vote on murder? Assassinations are not only immoral, they are stupid. You can’t stop intelligence with a bomb.
Does anyone think that Iran will suddenly say, “Oh my. We would like to build nuclear capabilities such as that of our neighbors, but we must not upset the Americans or the Israelis?” Or, will killing a scientist or even bombing a reactor only increase their determination to speed up their progress? It might set them back a couple of years, but does anyone think that this is going to be the end of it? It is only a matter of time before the rage in Iran will strike back. Of course, our media will cry about the lack of Islamic morality and report the retaliation as a naked act of hostility. Killing top scientists will increase their determination to strike back at Israel and the U.S. Can you imagine the outrage if Iran started killing American scientists?
There are three reasons why the hawks are willing, or even eager to go to war with Iran. One: they will not have to do the fighting and dying. Two: they will not have to pay for it. And three: they are certain that we will win it. Let the politicians talk about imposing a universal draft, including their own sons and daughters, talk about raising taxes immediately to pay for it, and admit right up front that a war with Iran will not be a cake walk and would probably drag on for decades with no certain outcome, and suddenly we might start hearing different rhetoric coming from our leaders.
Before we allow Israel to drag us into another war, someone needs to ask whose army is going to fight it, how are we going to pay for it, and how in the world are we going to get out of it.
Thomas Are
February 9, 2012
[1] The Week, A Death in Tehran, January 27, 2012, p.4.
When Hamas does it, it is terrorism. When Hezbollah does it, it’s terrorism,” said Tod Robberson in The Dallas Morning News. So presumably, it was also an act of terrorism last week when two men on a motorcycle raced through morning rush hour traffic in the streets of Tehran and stuck a magnet bomb to a car carrying Mostafa Ahmadi Roshan, deputy director of Iran’s nuclear enrichment plant. Roshan, 32 was killed, along with his bodyguard, becoming the fifth Iranian nuclear scientist to die a violent, mysterious death in recent years. No one doubts that Israel’s Mossad is behind these sophisticated assassinations, probably with U.S. help.[1]
Do we have to vote on murder? Assassinations are not only immoral, they are stupid. You can’t stop intelligence with a bomb.
Does anyone think that Iran will suddenly say, “Oh my. We would like to build nuclear capabilities such as that of our neighbors, but we must not upset the Americans or the Israelis?” Or, will killing a scientist or even bombing a reactor only increase their determination to speed up their progress? It might set them back a couple of years, but does anyone think that this is going to be the end of it? It is only a matter of time before the rage in Iran will strike back. Of course, our media will cry about the lack of Islamic morality and report the retaliation as a naked act of hostility. Killing top scientists will increase their determination to strike back at Israel and the U.S. Can you imagine the outrage if Iran started killing American scientists?
There are three reasons why the hawks are willing, or even eager to go to war with Iran. One: they will not have to do the fighting and dying. Two: they will not have to pay for it. And three: they are certain that we will win it. Let the politicians talk about imposing a universal draft, including their own sons and daughters, talk about raising taxes immediately to pay for it, and admit right up front that a war with Iran will not be a cake walk and would probably drag on for decades with no certain outcome, and suddenly we might start hearing different rhetoric coming from our leaders.
Before we allow Israel to drag us into another war, someone needs to ask whose army is going to fight it, how are we going to pay for it, and how in the world are we going to get out of it.
Thomas Are
February 9, 2012
[1] The Week, A Death in Tehran, January 27, 2012, p.4.
Sunday, December 18, 2011
The Big Lie
When I went to the movies as a kid, I always rooted for the cowboys. When I grew up I rooted for the Indians. Why? Because I read a little history and realized that the movies had lied to me.
If all we know about the conflict between Israel and the Palestinians is what we learn by watching The EXODUS by Leon Uris, or by listening to Fox News, or following the Republican Presidential debates, then we will root for the Jews. On the other hand, read any reliable historian and we will pull, work for, and pray for the Palestinians.
Now Newt Gingrich perpetuates the lie, portraying Israel as the victim. I wonder if he has ever read any of the many Jewish historians such as Gershom Gorenberg, Ilan Pappe, Norman Finkelstein, Marc Ellis, Mark Braverman, Jeff Halper, Sarah Roy or Rachelle Marshall, among many others. If so, he would have never declared the Palestinians an “invented people.” Of course, he did not just make up this little bit of propaganda. When she was Prime Minister of Israel, Golda Meir declared:
It was not as though there was a Palestinian people in Palestine … and we came and threw them out and took their country away from them. They did not exist.[1]
Even as she said it, she knew that she was ignoring history. What she denied was exactly what Israel had done and she later admitted it. Alan Hart, one of the few reporters Golda Meir publically respected and referred to as her good friend writes that Golda had sent Lou Kaddar, her most trusted confidant to visit him with a message:
“Do you remember the TV interview in which Golda told you that there was no such thing as a Palestinian and that Palestinians did not exist?”
“My dear Lou” I replied, “not only do I remember, the whole world remembers and will never forget.”
Lou continued, “Golda told me to give you a message, but she made me promise I would not deliver it until she was dead. She told me to tell you that as soon as those words left her mouth, she knew they were the silliest damn thing she had ever said.”[2]
She was right. In writing of that time period, historian Arnold Toynbee declared:
The treatment of Palestinian Arabs in 1947 (and 1948) was as morally indefensible as the slaughter of six million Jews by the Nazis … Though not comparable in quantity to the crimes of the Nazis, it was comparable in quality.[3]
Newt Gingrich is an historian, but he is also a politician and he knows how the system works. He knows that 76 percent of American Jewry is concentrated in six states – New York California, Pennsylvania, Illinois, Ohio and Florida. These states control 181 of the 270 electoral votes needed to elect the next president. Alan Hart writes, “Politicians have been mesmerized by fear of the ‘Jewish vote’ and by those who claim they can deliver the ‘swing vote’ in a hotly contested state.”[4] You just can’t be elected president without those swing votes
Of course, Mitt Romney also knows this. So we hear him saying such things as, “I’d get on the phone to my friend Bibi Netanyahu and say, ‘Would it help if I said this? What would you like me to do?”
Could it be that presidential candidates are willing to put aside their sense of justice and feelings of compassion for votes?
I fear that until promoting such a lie and licking the boots of Bibi Netanyahu costs them as many votes as it generates, some candidates will say anything even if it is contrary to history, morality and the teachings of their own faith.
However, just for the sake of argument, let’s say that the Republican politicians are right and that there has never been a people called Palestinians. There is one now. Does that in any way justify Israel’s aggression?
The question is:
Who is occupying whose land?
Who is stealing whose water?
Who is killing whose children and bombing their schools?
Who is assassinating whose elected leaders?
Who is pushing who into the sea?
Who, in reality, is denying whose right to exist?
Palestinians now live on 22 percent of what used to be their land and have offered peace with Israel just to allow them to survive on what is left to them. Who sabotages peace talks by increasing settlements and who gets punished with blockades and roadblocks for democratically electing their own government?
To portray Israel as the victim may get votes, but it’s a lie and any reader of history should know it, including Newt.
Thomas Are
December 18, 2011
[1] Naim Ateek, Justice and Only Justice, (Orbis Press, 1989) p.36.
[2] Alan Hart, Zionism, The Real Enemy of the Jews, Volume One, (Clarity Press, 2009) p. 61.
[3] Ibid. p.32.
[4] Ibid., p. 192 Hart goes on to say, “The inordinate Israelist influence over the White House, the Congress and other elected officials, stems principally from the ability to pander to the alleged ‘Jewish vote’ as well as fill the campaign coffers of both parties with timely contributions on a national as well as local level, while taking advantage of the anachronistic system by which American Presidents are elected. p. 193.
If all we know about the conflict between Israel and the Palestinians is what we learn by watching The EXODUS by Leon Uris, or by listening to Fox News, or following the Republican Presidential debates, then we will root for the Jews. On the other hand, read any reliable historian and we will pull, work for, and pray for the Palestinians.
Now Newt Gingrich perpetuates the lie, portraying Israel as the victim. I wonder if he has ever read any of the many Jewish historians such as Gershom Gorenberg, Ilan Pappe, Norman Finkelstein, Marc Ellis, Mark Braverman, Jeff Halper, Sarah Roy or Rachelle Marshall, among many others. If so, he would have never declared the Palestinians an “invented people.” Of course, he did not just make up this little bit of propaganda. When she was Prime Minister of Israel, Golda Meir declared:
It was not as though there was a Palestinian people in Palestine … and we came and threw them out and took their country away from them. They did not exist.[1]
Even as she said it, she knew that she was ignoring history. What she denied was exactly what Israel had done and she later admitted it. Alan Hart, one of the few reporters Golda Meir publically respected and referred to as her good friend writes that Golda had sent Lou Kaddar, her most trusted confidant to visit him with a message:
“Do you remember the TV interview in which Golda told you that there was no such thing as a Palestinian and that Palestinians did not exist?”
“My dear Lou” I replied, “not only do I remember, the whole world remembers and will never forget.”
Lou continued, “Golda told me to give you a message, but she made me promise I would not deliver it until she was dead. She told me to tell you that as soon as those words left her mouth, she knew they were the silliest damn thing she had ever said.”[2]
She was right. In writing of that time period, historian Arnold Toynbee declared:
The treatment of Palestinian Arabs in 1947 (and 1948) was as morally indefensible as the slaughter of six million Jews by the Nazis … Though not comparable in quantity to the crimes of the Nazis, it was comparable in quality.[3]
Newt Gingrich is an historian, but he is also a politician and he knows how the system works. He knows that 76 percent of American Jewry is concentrated in six states – New York California, Pennsylvania, Illinois, Ohio and Florida. These states control 181 of the 270 electoral votes needed to elect the next president. Alan Hart writes, “Politicians have been mesmerized by fear of the ‘Jewish vote’ and by those who claim they can deliver the ‘swing vote’ in a hotly contested state.”[4] You just can’t be elected president without those swing votes
Of course, Mitt Romney also knows this. So we hear him saying such things as, “I’d get on the phone to my friend Bibi Netanyahu and say, ‘Would it help if I said this? What would you like me to do?”
Could it be that presidential candidates are willing to put aside their sense of justice and feelings of compassion for votes?
I fear that until promoting such a lie and licking the boots of Bibi Netanyahu costs them as many votes as it generates, some candidates will say anything even if it is contrary to history, morality and the teachings of their own faith.
However, just for the sake of argument, let’s say that the Republican politicians are right and that there has never been a people called Palestinians. There is one now. Does that in any way justify Israel’s aggression?
The question is:
Who is occupying whose land?
Who is stealing whose water?
Who is killing whose children and bombing their schools?
Who is assassinating whose elected leaders?
Who is pushing who into the sea?
Who, in reality, is denying whose right to exist?
Palestinians now live on 22 percent of what used to be their land and have offered peace with Israel just to allow them to survive on what is left to them. Who sabotages peace talks by increasing settlements and who gets punished with blockades and roadblocks for democratically electing their own government?
To portray Israel as the victim may get votes, but it’s a lie and any reader of history should know it, including Newt.
Thomas Are
December 18, 2011
[1] Naim Ateek, Justice and Only Justice, (Orbis Press, 1989) p.36.
[2] Alan Hart, Zionism, The Real Enemy of the Jews, Volume One, (Clarity Press, 2009) p. 61.
[3] Ibid. p.32.
[4] Ibid., p. 192 Hart goes on to say, “The inordinate Israelist influence over the White House, the Congress and other elected officials, stems principally from the ability to pander to the alleged ‘Jewish vote’ as well as fill the campaign coffers of both parties with timely contributions on a national as well as local level, while taking advantage of the anachronistic system by which American Presidents are elected. p. 193.
Sunday, November 20, 2011
Presbytery Vote - Part Three
“Are you not being hard on the Presbyterians? ” Someone challenged.
“Well, yes, I am.” I said. “You see, that my crowd. I have been a part of the Presbyterian family my whole life. I know the great works in which we are engaged and I know the benevolent and caring heart of the Presbyterian Church. That is why I am so baffled by this ‘blind spot’ when it comes to justice for the Palestinians. The issue is too serious to be side-stepped.”
When it came time to vote to support the Christian leaders of Israel/Palestine during the Presbytery meeting I attended, someone asked, “How can we vote for a people whose government, Hamas, trains kids to strap bombs on their bodies and walk into a crowd to kill people?” He was grossly concerned about the deaths caused by rockets and suicide bombers. After all, eleven Israelis were killed during the three years prior to Israel’s “deployment” from Gaza. However, he expressed no concern for the one thousand, two hundred-fifty Gazans, including two hundred twenty-two children, killed by the Israeli army during that same time.[1] Norman Finkelstein reports:
Hamas agreed to accept any peace agreement negotiated between the leaders of the PLO and Israel … Israel officials knew full well before they attacked Gaza that despite the charter a diplomatic settlement could have been reached with Hamas.”[2]
I agree with the speaker, suicide bombers and rockets are bad. They kill innocent people and that is always bad. Not only that, I don’t believe they work. For there to be peace between Israel and Palestine, both sides are going to have to compromise and reach across the table with forgiveness and respect. Suicide bombers are not going to bring down the IDF. Israel’s military is the fourth largest in the world. Suicide bombers and rockets will only make the average Israeli feel insecure. We don’t reach out with trust and respect as long as we feel insecure. Threaten me and I will trench in and come out swinging. I wish there were no bombs and rockets.
However, having said that, I can understand the frustration which drives a defenseless people, being mistreated and misrepresented for decades to strike out in any way they can. Why are we not asking, what is so bad that it would cause a young boy or girl to take their own life just to make a statement? We have one life to live. What drives these kids to sacrifice themselves?
Last week I quoted Philip Slater, as saying, “The Gaza Strip is little more than a large Israeli concentration camp, in which Palestinians are attacked at will, starved of food, fuel, energy – even deprived of hospital supplies.” He goes on to say, “It would be difficult to have any respect for them if they didn’t fire a few rockets back.”
I don’t think it is a matter of respect. It’s a matter of pain. Imagine yourself living in a refugee camp with no hope of ever gaining a better life, no matter what you do. After all, your parents have lived their entire life in these camps. They have never committed a crime, never been charged with a crime, never been to any court. They just happened to live in a village that was given to European Jews to be the State of Israel by the United Nations sixty two years ago. Bear in mind that the first suicide bombing was in 1994. That was 46 years after Israel destroyed 418 villages and drove 750,000 of your people into exile and 27 years after Israel again occupied your land and began treating you like an animal, and six weeks after Baruch Goldstein walked into a Mosque in Hebron and shot to death 29 of your neighbors as they prayed. During all this time, the world, including the church, said nothing. You are invisible and forgotten. How long before you would strike back?
Gideon Levy, award winning Israeli journalist, writes:
Nobody would have given any thought to the fate of the people of Gaza if they had not behaved violently. That is a bitter truth, but the first twenty years of the occupation passed quietly and we did not lift a finger to end it.[3]
Then when the Christian leaders of Palestine begged the church in the United States to at least become informed as to what is happening to them, our Presbytery voted 37 to 65 to ignore their plea. So, yes, I will try to continue to be “hard on us.” If we are to be the church, we must do better. It’s as much for our sake as for the Palestinians.
Rabbi Michael Lerner, in his magazine Tikkun, writes about “The Violence of Not Seeing.” Think about it.
Thomas Are
November 21, 2011
[1] Norman Finkelstein, This Tine We Went Too Far, (OR Books, 2011) p.26
[2] Ibid., p. 45
[3] Gideon Levy, The Punishment of Gaza, (Verso, New York, 2010) p.21.
“Well, yes, I am.” I said. “You see, that my crowd. I have been a part of the Presbyterian family my whole life. I know the great works in which we are engaged and I know the benevolent and caring heart of the Presbyterian Church. That is why I am so baffled by this ‘blind spot’ when it comes to justice for the Palestinians. The issue is too serious to be side-stepped.”
When it came time to vote to support the Christian leaders of Israel/Palestine during the Presbytery meeting I attended, someone asked, “How can we vote for a people whose government, Hamas, trains kids to strap bombs on their bodies and walk into a crowd to kill people?” He was grossly concerned about the deaths caused by rockets and suicide bombers. After all, eleven Israelis were killed during the three years prior to Israel’s “deployment” from Gaza. However, he expressed no concern for the one thousand, two hundred-fifty Gazans, including two hundred twenty-two children, killed by the Israeli army during that same time.[1] Norman Finkelstein reports:
Hamas agreed to accept any peace agreement negotiated between the leaders of the PLO and Israel … Israel officials knew full well before they attacked Gaza that despite the charter a diplomatic settlement could have been reached with Hamas.”[2]
I agree with the speaker, suicide bombers and rockets are bad. They kill innocent people and that is always bad. Not only that, I don’t believe they work. For there to be peace between Israel and Palestine, both sides are going to have to compromise and reach across the table with forgiveness and respect. Suicide bombers are not going to bring down the IDF. Israel’s military is the fourth largest in the world. Suicide bombers and rockets will only make the average Israeli feel insecure. We don’t reach out with trust and respect as long as we feel insecure. Threaten me and I will trench in and come out swinging. I wish there were no bombs and rockets.
However, having said that, I can understand the frustration which drives a defenseless people, being mistreated and misrepresented for decades to strike out in any way they can. Why are we not asking, what is so bad that it would cause a young boy or girl to take their own life just to make a statement? We have one life to live. What drives these kids to sacrifice themselves?
Last week I quoted Philip Slater, as saying, “The Gaza Strip is little more than a large Israeli concentration camp, in which Palestinians are attacked at will, starved of food, fuel, energy – even deprived of hospital supplies.” He goes on to say, “It would be difficult to have any respect for them if they didn’t fire a few rockets back.”
I don’t think it is a matter of respect. It’s a matter of pain. Imagine yourself living in a refugee camp with no hope of ever gaining a better life, no matter what you do. After all, your parents have lived their entire life in these camps. They have never committed a crime, never been charged with a crime, never been to any court. They just happened to live in a village that was given to European Jews to be the State of Israel by the United Nations sixty two years ago. Bear in mind that the first suicide bombing was in 1994. That was 46 years after Israel destroyed 418 villages and drove 750,000 of your people into exile and 27 years after Israel again occupied your land and began treating you like an animal, and six weeks after Baruch Goldstein walked into a Mosque in Hebron and shot to death 29 of your neighbors as they prayed. During all this time, the world, including the church, said nothing. You are invisible and forgotten. How long before you would strike back?
Gideon Levy, award winning Israeli journalist, writes:
Nobody would have given any thought to the fate of the people of Gaza if they had not behaved violently. That is a bitter truth, but the first twenty years of the occupation passed quietly and we did not lift a finger to end it.[3]
Then when the Christian leaders of Palestine begged the church in the United States to at least become informed as to what is happening to them, our Presbytery voted 37 to 65 to ignore their plea. So, yes, I will try to continue to be “hard on us.” If we are to be the church, we must do better. It’s as much for our sake as for the Palestinians.
Rabbi Michael Lerner, in his magazine Tikkun, writes about “The Violence of Not Seeing.” Think about it.
Thomas Are
November 21, 2011
[1] Norman Finkelstein, This Tine We Went Too Far, (OR Books, 2011) p.26
[2] Ibid., p. 45
[3] Gideon Levy, The Punishment of Gaza, (Verso, New York, 2010) p.21.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
