Rapture Theology, Our Greatest Heresy

Through the years, the church, of which I am a part, has faced many heresies, not the least of which was its support of racism.  The old Southern Presbyterian Church, called the Confederate Church, was born on December 6, 1861 in Augusta, Georgia.  The biggest issue facing the nation at that time was slavery. What should be the role of the church?  James H. Thornwell, one of the forefathers of my denomination, sidestepped the whole problem when he addressed the first meeting of the General Assembly by declaring slavery beyond the authority of the church:

In the first place, we would have it distinctly understood that, in our ecclesiastical capacity, we are neither the friends nor the foes of slavery; that is to say, we have no commission either to propagate or abolish it. The policy of its existence is a question which exclusively belongs to the state. We have no right, as a church to enjoin it as a duty, or condemn it as a sin…The social, civil, political problems connected with this subject transcend our sphere, as God has not entrusted to his Church the organization of society, nor the allotment of individuals to their various stations.[1]

Refusal to address that heresy is an embarrassment which continues until this day.

Also, I think of the heresy of nationalism.  I have never been comfortable with putting the American flag in the sanctuary because it seems almost inevitable for the average member of my congregations to identify the mission of the church with the success of America.  They quote, ”My country, right or wrong.” However, they seldom quote the rest of it,  “My country, right or wrong. When right, to be kept right, when wrong, to be made right”  The failure of the church to address the unchristian actions of the United States has allowed such ungodly policies as condoning torture, tolerating poverty and polluting the atmosphere.  Not only will the church’s silence on these matters lead to the downfall of America, it will eventually corrode the soul of the church.

Heresies abound, and the church has survived them. However, it is painful to see the church so anemic when facing the heresy of Zionism. I am not thinking of the five million Jewish Zionists.  That is a Jewish heresy, but that is a problem to be addressed by the Jewish community.   I have in mind the fifty million so called Christian Zionists, the CZs, who are far more Z then C.,  those who support the state of Israel, right or wrong. More specifically, they promote the idea that God gave  Palestine to the Jews, therefore anything Israel does to claim that divine donation is of God, including the theft of land and water, robbing Palestinians of their livelihood and dignity, and the indiscriminate bombing of unarmed civilian men, women and children.  I fear that after the Palestinians have been wiped out, all the church will have left is a guilty conscience and our children asking us, “How could you have let it happen?” It will not do to simply say, “We did not know.”

Stephen Sizar, author of several books on Christian Zionism says:

It is my conclusion after more than 10 years of postgraduate research that Christian Zionism is the largest, most controversial and most destructive lobby within Christianity. It bears primary responsibility for perpetuating tensions in the Middle East, justifying Israel’s apartheid colonialist agenda and for undermining the peace process between Israel and the Palestinians.[2]

And it is all based on the heresy of Rapture Theology. So:

WHAT IS RAPTURE THEOLOGY?

I start by confessing that I am neither a Biblical scholar nor a church historian. But, one does not have to be an expert to recognize the danger of the Rapture Theology promoted by the Christian Zionists.

Most Christians had never heard of Rapture Theology until very recently. Suddenly, it seems that the mega-television churches have become afflicted with a terminal case of “end of the world” madness.  

According to the CZs,  (Christian Zionists)  seven weeks before the second coming and final judgment, true Christians will be “raptured up to heaven.”  From there, they will watch those left behind suffer “tribulation” and war as the tribulation army will fight against the anti-Christ, usually defined as Obama, Khrushchev, the  United Nations or more recently, Islam.   After seven years, Jesus will return to Jerusalem to fight the great battle of Armageddon. Of course,  Jesus wins and rules for a thousand years from his throne in Jerusalem, at which time, every person gets judged. Most of “them” will go to hell.

HOW AND WHEN DID THIS GET STARTED?

In 1882, a man named John Nelson Darby, after finding little success in Britain, came to America during the time of the “Great Awakening.” He preached that God has two people, Jews and Christians, but only one, the Jews, has an everlasting covenant with God.  That in itself would have been harmless enough, but Darby goes on to proclaim that Jesus will return twice, first to rapture his true believers to safety and then to war with the anti-Christ. After his victory, Jesus will rule from Jerusalem for a thousand years before the final judgment.   I hasten to point out that no where do our Christian creeds or the  Bible describe Jesus as returning twice. So, where did Darby get his information?

He claims that it came from I Thessalonians 4:16-17.

 For the Lord himself will descend from heaven with a cry of command, with the archangel’s call, and with the sound of the trumpet of God. And the dead in Christ will rise first; then we who are alive, who are left, shall be caught up together with them in the clouds to meet the Lord in the air; and so we shall always be with the Lord.

The believers of Thessalonica were concerned about their loved ones who were already dead and what will happen to them when Jesus returns?  Paul says, Not to worry. Then like declaring a doxology, he explains, They will rise first, to meet Jesus in the air, then it will be our turn.

What the CZs fail to point out is that there is no suggestion in this, or any other Biblical text, that Jesus gathers a crowd unto himself and reverses direction. It was the custom in those days to go out and meet a king, a dignitary, or bridegroom (Mt. 25:6, Acts 28)  and escort him into the city. But, they never changed directions and go off with their king.  

Most significantly, Darby’s goal is for Christians to escape the world and its problems, not to redeem it.  To him, the role of Jesus is to judge sinners, not forgive them.  For 1800  years, no Christian theologian ever saw this “coming in two stages.”

In 1909, Cyrus Scofield came out with his Bible, complete with footnotes supporting  Rapture Theology. Scofield saw the Bible as composed of seven water tight eras which he called dispensations.  We are now living in the sixth department. In fact, the church, according to Scofield’s footnotes, is but a parenthesis, no longer relevant when the rapture occurs.

Then, in 1970, Hal Lindsey shocked the Christian world with his book, The  Late Great Planet Earth. Lindsey was absolutely certain that the rapture was just around the corner and that Israel was its focus. How did he know?  He took three verses out of Matthew.

From the fig tree learn its lesson: as soon as its branches becomes tender and puts forth its leaves, you know that summer is near. So also, when you see all these things, you know that he is near, at the very gates. Truly, I say to you, this generation will not pass away till all these things take place. Heaven and earth will pass away, but my words will not pass away. (24: 32-35).

Wow!, said Lindsey. The fig tree must mean Israel, and by tender branches, Matthew must be referring to the establishment of the state of Israel in 1948. Thus, Israel is the fulfillment of Biblical prophesy. If a generation can be thought of as 40 years, that means that the rapture, with Jesus coming to Jerusalem, will take place in 1988.  He sold millions of copies.   When 1988 passed without the rapture, he simply revised his timetable and sold more books identifying Russia as the anti-Christ.  Today, he says the anti-Christ is an Arab and that the rapture is "coming soon".

More recently, in the 1990s, the Left Behind, series by Tim LaHaye, hit the market

selling 64 million copies.  You can still go into any book store and ask for Left Behind
The sales person will say, “Of course, we have them. The fiction department is right over
there.”  Not only is LaHaye’s book fiction, his theology is also fiction.  The word rapture
is found no where in the Old or New Testaments.  Look to the signs, he says; wars,
tsunami, Katrina, militarism and Israel’s expansionism. It’s all God’s will. It all leads to
the Rapture. 

John Hagee, is quoted as saying, “God’s plan is to destroy the earth and there is nothing we can do to stop it”

Hal Lindsey, “I grieve over the lost world. Our hope is in the Rapture”“
Jack Van Impe, “Armageddon cannot be avoided.”

Rapture Theology does not make the world better. It seeks to save a chosen few out of the world.  Look at all of the above and you will find little concern for the poor. Some even oppose welfare ministries as being contrary to God’s plan. 

Matthew tells of two men working in the field, suddenly one is taken and the other is left behind.  But what the CZs fail to acknowledge is that the one taken was taken in judgment. (14:39-42)  Being “left behind” is actually the desired fate. Being “taken” would mean being carried off by dark forces like a death squad.

There is no Biblical teaching that the church will be raptured off the earth before Jesus comes to Israel.  Tim LaHaye,  points out that the last time the church is mentioned in the Book of Revelation is in chapter 4, verse 1.  Therefore he concludes that the church must have been raptured.  However, “saints” are very much present throughout the entire book.

In fact, the basic message of the Book of Revelation is that God hears the cry of the “saints,” and will come to them. 

The entire Bible is about justice, not about stealing land and water from Palestinians.  The Book of Revelation pulls back the curtain on Roman power and attacks Roman oppression. It was written for the little people and it warns us of the consequences of failing to feed the hungry and defend the oppressed. The prophets condemned injustice and greed. They advocated for the poor and widows. They did not proclaim a play by play of the future judgments of God.

Many point out that the Book of Revelation is about a Lamb who conquered by shedding his own blood, not shedding the blood of others, it’s about terror defeated, not terror inflicted.

While dispensationalists make the claim that raptured saints are part of the “army of heaven” that returns to earth with Jesus to fight in Revelation 19:14 in what they call the “Glorious Appearing,” this claim is not substantiated in Revelation… and amazingly, no actual attack or war is ever pictured.[3] 

Daniel 9:25-27 says that when the anointed one comes, “sacrifices shall cease.”  Again, the CZs reason that for sacrifices to cease, they must, in fact, be taking place. They declare that everyone knows that the only proper place for a Jew to make a sacrifice is in the temple in Jerusalem.  But, the temple was destroyed by the Romans in 70CE.  Thus, for Jesus to come again, the temple must be rebuilt and it must be rebuilt on the temple mount on the exact spot where Muslims now worship in the Al-Aqsa Mosque.  So, we hear conversations about destroying the Dome of the Rock and building another temple so Jesus will have a landing place in Jerusalem. Some CZ churches actually send money to a group called the “Temple Mount Faithful,” who are committed to doing exactly that, to blowing up the Islamic Mosque in Jerusalem, even at the risk of a Third World War.  We also hear our politicians declaring that Jerusalem must never be divided and let’s move the US Embassy to Jerusalem.  It’s OK to keep three million Palestinians under brutal occupation, create the largest refugee population on earth, steal land and water, kill and drive out native Palestinians, it’s all a matter of prophesy. (or campaign contributions).       

Christian Zionists make numerous tours to the “Holy land” every year and never talk to a Palestinian, not even to a fellow Christian. 

WE SHOULD BE OUTRAGED.   

Why? Because this heresy is driving our U.S. foreign policy

Yet, Fifty million CZs claim to be speaking for real Christianity as they promote Rapture Theology.  The question is, can the church survive 50 million heretics?  Probably, but the Palestinians certainly will not. And what will we be worth, if we do and they don’t?

                                                                                                Thomas L. Are

                                                                                                October 24, 2013

---

[1] Maurice W. Armstrong, Lefferts A. Loetcher, and Charles A. Anderson, ed., The Presbyterian Enterprise: Source of American Presbyterian History, (Westminster Press, Philadelphia, 1961) p. 215

[2] Stephen Sizar, Christan Zionism: The New Heresy that Undermines Middle East peace.  (See www.stephensizer.com)

[3] See Barbara Rossing, The Rapture Exposed. (Basic Books, 2004) p.  p. 121.

Some Things to Think About

Benjamin Netanyahu seems panic-stricken over Iran. 

Sunday’s newspapers report:

Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu moved quickly to block even tentative steps by Iran and the United States to ease tensions and move toward  negotiations to end the nuclear crisis, signaling what is likely to be a sustained campaign by Israel to head off any deal…”The test is not in what Rouhani says, but in the deeds of the Iranian regime.”[1]

Dore Gold, president of the Jerusalem Center for Public Affairs and former Netanyahu aide, adds “Israel is clearly focused on Iranian action.” 

How in heavens name can he make such a statement and keep a straight face?  Without question, Israel has hundreds of nuclear weapons.  However, it seems that our political position is that if Israel drops bombs on unarmed civilians, explodes chemical weapons on children and stockpiles an arsenal of nuclear weapons, it is a legitimate act of security. If Iran even thinks of doing such things, it’s a crime that must be punished.

While Iran has invaded no one, or even threatened to invade anyone, Israel has attacked Palestine, Egypt, Syria, Lebanon and Iraq.  Israel has pulled off numerous “assassinations” of Iran’s leading scientists, while drawing red lines on maps to threaten the use of WMDs.  So, who is the neighborhood bully?

Netanyahu cries “security,” but it may not be for the reasons he wants us to believe. It could be that security is the last thing he wants.  Why? For at least two reasons:

First – The belief that Israel is being threatened keeps Israel’s economy thriving. When my friend Chris Weaver said that 40% of Israel’s economy depends upon military and security operations, he was challenged. Ilise Cohen, scholar and activist member of Jewish Voice for Peace, said that his figure was actually too conservative.  Regardless, without an enemy out there to fear, Israel’s economy would collapse, even with huge parts of it financed by the U.S. taxpayer.

Second – Keeping Iran on the hot plate, which does nothing for the US and our relations with the rest of the world, serves another important strategy of Netanyahu. It keeps our focus off of his continued building of Jewish only settlements in Palestine, the construction of his apartheid wall, the theft of Palestinian water, the humiliation of check points and road blocks, and the destruction of olive trees, none of which has anything to do with security.

In the midst of Netanyahu’s cry of, “they are out to get us” several questions about Iran’s nuclear program begin to surface.   

In spite of all the sympathy Netanyahu gets from quoting Ahmadinejad as saying Iran wants to “wipe Israel off the map,” The Washington Post, The New York Times and other news organizations including AntiWar.com, contradict his translation of Ahmadinejad’s speech in October, 2005. What Ahmadinejad actually said in Farsi was, “this regime occupying Jerusalem must disappear from the page of time.”[2]  He proclaimed a moral condemnation,  not a physical threat.  He anticipated the fall of Israel’s apartheid political structure, not the annihilation of the Jewish people.

Why should anyone give Iran the benefit of the doubt?  Because in 1982, when Iraq attacked Iran which began an eight year war, Iraq dropped poison gas on the cities of Iran. Yet, in spite of the fact that more than 10,000 Iranians were killed by the use of mustard and nerve gas, from which 90,000 still suffer to this day, and in spite of the fact the Iran had the capacity to produce such weapons, Iran refused to retaliate in like manner.  Their ultra conservative interpretation of the Koran which still governs the Islamic Republic of Iran views Weapons of Mass Destruction as a violation of Islamic morality.  For what its worth, there has never been an Iranian suicide bomber.  If Iran’s religion prohibits the use of chemical weapons because it is immoral to kill innocent people, surely, and here is the point, Iran’s fundamental commitment to Islam would not allow the use of a nuclear bomb. To do so is “forbidden by God.”

Are not all the reasons we are given as to why we must invade Iran; WMDs, violations of human rights and sponsoring terrorism not the same reason we heard ten years ago as reasons why we must invade Iraq?  Israel has been declaring for the last 20 years that Iran is only a year or two from acquiring nuclear weapons and that it is an unbelievably horrible place to live.

Then why, in spite of diaspora groups offering $30,000 per family on top of Israel’s governmental incentives, Iran’s Jewish community, the largest in the Middle East outside Israel, refuse to leave Iran to emigrate to Israel?

Today, Jews in the Islamic Republic vote like other Iranians for president and for deputies to represent their cities and towns in parliament. But the Jewish community is also constitutionally guaranteed a seat of it own in the Majles, (Parliament), even though it is much smaller than a normal parliamentary district. There are at least two dozen functioning synagogues (some with Hebrew schools), 21 kosher restaurants, and a Jewish newspaper in Tehran, there is a 20,000 volume Jewish library, a Jewish hospital and Jews serve in the Iranian army.[3]

The question is, why don’t we try doing things to remove from Iran the motives for wanting war, such as:  lifting sanctions, curtailing Israel’s assassination of Iran’s young scientists and why don’t we muzzle Netanyahu?

Of course, our economy, especially for the wealthiest of the wealthy,  also depends upon having enemies out there. But have we not created enough enemies in Iraq, Afghanistan, Yemen, Pakistan, Libya, Egypt and Palestine to satisfy the hunger of our own military industrial complex?  Do we really want a war with Iran too?

Just something to think about.

                                                                                    Thomas L Are

                                                                                    October 11, 2013

---

[1] The Atlanta Journal-Constitution, Sept. 21, 2013. p. A-3

[2] See Going to Tehran, By Flynt and Hillary Mann Leverett,   (Metropolittan Books, 2013.) p.19. Washington Post, October 5, 2011;  The New York Times, June 11, 2006;Antiwar.com, May 26, 2007

[3] Going to Tehran, By Flynt and Hillary Mann Leverett,   (Metropolittan Books, 2013.) p 93..

Cover Up for Israel

During dinner with a friend, I happened to mention that it was the 46^th. anniversary of the assault on the Liberty. My guest, a college professor, responded that she did not know about the Liberty. Even though her field of study was science, not history, I was surprised. I should not have been. She represents a large segment of  America’s educated community and she did not know anything about the USS Liberty.  Of course, it is not her fault.  The news of the Liberty was covered up.  How could she know?  I sat there comparing the assault on the Liberty with the assault on Benghazi.

I don’t know what happened in Benghazi. Don’t guess we will ever know. Congress is screaming to find out.  “We must investigate,” they say. “We’ll leave no stone unturned.  It’s our duty to know. Our credibility is at stake.”

We may never know what happened last September in Benghazi, which caused the death of three brave Americans. However, I do know what happened on June 8, 1967. Israel deliberately attacked an unarmed American ship in international waters, killed 34 brave American sailors, wounded 171 others, and Congress has, to this day, refused to  investigate what or why it happened.

What happened is abundantly clear. Israel’s warplanes, on a sunny afternoon, after circling numerous times, bombed and machine gunned the U.S.S. Liberty. With the Stars and Stripes flying and the ship’s identification numbers clearly visible, Israeli jets struck the antenna to hinder any SOS call for help. Torpedo boats blasted the Liberty while Israeli aircraft strafed our men aboard and dropped napalm on the decks.  Israel fired on the crew as they tried to rescue their fellow sailors and shot up life rafts in the water to prevent there being any survivors.  Yet, none of this merited a Congressional investigation.

Professor James Petras writes:

In an unprecedented act of betrayal, President Johnson, in close liaison with powerful American Jewish Zionist political backers, covered up the mass murder on the high seas by issuing orders, first to recall Mediterranean-based warplanes from rushing to assist their besieged comrades, then threatening to court-martial the survivors who might expose the deliberate nature of the Israeli assault and finally by repeating the Israeli line that the attack was a matter of mistaken identity, a lie which numerous military leaders rejected.[i]

Admiral Thomas Moorer, Chair of the Joint Chief of Staff, described the official conclusion of the Naval Court of Inquiry as a whitewash and “one of the classic all-American cover-up”.   

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.[ii]   

Secretary of State Dean Rusk agreed,

I was never satisfied with the Israeli explanation. Their sustained attack to disable and sink Liberty precluded an assault by accident or some trigger-happy local commander. Through diplomatic channels we refused to accept their explanations. I didn't believe them then, and I don't believe them to this day. The attack was outrageous.[iii]

In 2002, Captain Ward Boston, JAGC, U.S. Navy, senior counsel for the Court of Inquiry, said that the Court's findings were intended to cover up what was a deliberate attack by Israel on a ship it knew to be American.

 

Israel claimed it was an accident. Yet, I know from personal conversation with the late Admiral Isaac C. Kidd ---president of the Court of Inquiry --- that President Johnson and Secretary of Defense McNamara ordered him to conclude that the attack was a case of “mistaken identity.” [iv]

Jamal Kanz, Middle East scholar and author, wrote just last week:

The cover-up was finally exposed by an Israeli pilot who was interviewed 15 years later by former Congressman Paul McCloskey about the attack. The senior pilot revealed that he informed headquarters the target appeared to be a US ship, but was told to ignore the American flag and proceed with the attack.[v]

One Liberty survivor, David Lewis summed it up:

If it was an accident, it was the best planned accident I’ve ever heard of.[vi]

Even if it were 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. Was Johnson afraid of Israel?  Hardly.  He was afraid of the ire of the American Jewish voting community and its lobby. And that’s not the worst of it. Every president thereafter has yielded to an unwritten job description: He must above all else, cover up for Israel.

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.[vii]   He was right. And that is the worst of it.  

Thomas Are
June 25, 2013

---

[i] James Petras, War Crimes in Gaza and the Zionist Fifth Column in America, (Clarity Press, 2010) p.127

[ii] Paul Findley,  They Dare to Speak Out. (Lawrence Hill, New York., 1989) p. 179

[iii] Dean Rusk, As I Saw It, (WW Norton, 1990) p. 388.

[iv] Counterpunch.org, June 9, 2007.

[v] Jamal Kanz,  The USAs Irrational Relationship with Israel,  Intifada-Palestine Newsletter, June 6, 2013

[vi] BBC Documentary on the USS Liberty: Dead in the Water.

[vii] James Scott, The Attack on the Liberty,  Simon and Schuster, 2009.) p.287.

 

 

Does He Not Like Jews

My grandson pulled into the driveway.  His friend saw my bumper sticker;

                         FREE PALESTINE, END THE OCCUPATION,

and said, “What’s with your grandpa, does he not like Jews?”

It’s amazing that a desire to see an end to Palestinian suffering so immediately turns into Jew hating or anti-Semitism. Yet, all across America, the prevailing attitude is that Israel is so frail that the least question concerning Zionist conduct will destroy not only the nation of Israel, but Jews everywhere --- when in reality, the exact opposite is probably true.  Many, including myself, believe that if Israel does not listen to international criticism it may well destroy itself.

However, to address the question at hand,  The answer is: I do not like some Jews in spite of some very notable exceptions.  The exceptions are those Jewish leaders who sacrifice their relationship with their family, community and synagogue to call for an end to the occupation. Some get squeezed out of their jobs and have their professional life sabotaged because they defend the moral standards of their faith. I know and respect many Jews. They are “beautiful people.” 

On the other hand, some Jews, in spite of being intelligent, religious and fair minded in every other area of life seem to go totally blind when it comes to the atrocities of the State of Israel.  When they close their eyes to the illegal and unjust expansion of Israel into Palestinian lands, when they stand by, knowing that Israel is destroying homes, abusing children, bombing innocent people by the thousands, stealing water and uprooting Palestinian livelihood and when they generally defend Israel’s doing all it can to make life for Palestinians unbearable, then yes, you could say I do not like them.

I also do not like news reporters who act more like Israel’s defense attorneys than responsible journalist willing to share with the American audience what is going on in Palestine.  They speak endlessly about Israel’s “security” without ever mentioning the right of Palestinian security.  They use the word “terrorism” as if it is an exclusive product of Arabs in the Middle East without ever hinting that Israel and America might also be guilty of terrorism.  While dominating the news with Israeli rights, the term “occupation” is seldom mentioned or made visible. Yes, I do not like those who distort the truth about Netanyahu’s extremism, politicians of both parties who stand against Palestinian human rights or the Israeli lobby.

And I dislike even more the Christian Right, those super Christians who believe Palestinians have no rights because GOD wants it this way, saying “divine rights trump human rights”.  How ridiculous to think the god Jews call Yahweh chose them to be preferred above all others and gave the land of Palestine to the Jews as a sovereign, eternal and indisputable gift. Any questioning of the right of Israel to murder, displace, steal and torment the Palestinians is declared to be denying the authority of the Bible, and  a threat to world peace.  They say, “God wants it this way.”  This “theology” is not only declared by the likes of John Hagee and Pat Robertson, but believed by my neighbors who go to church every week to sing praises to the God of Israel.  Besides that, they declare that Jesus cannot come again except to the throne in Jerusalem and won’t come again until all that land is militarily controlled by Israel.  I want to ask, “How do they know?”  They will answer, “The Jewish Bible told me so.”

Nor do I like ignorant Americans who are proud of their ignorance.  A neighbor, also looking at my bumper sticker, said to me,  “I am not with you on this issue, big Tom.”  I invited him to lunch. We talked for an hour. I gave him a copy of Steadfast Hope, a short booklet with video concerning the history of the Israel/Palestine conflict published by the Presbyterian Church.  When we parted, he handed it back to me saying, “You might as well keep this. I am not going to read it.”  I drove home thinking, how can he be so certain of his position on such an important issue if he is unwilling to even hear the rest of the story?  I also thought that he is not alone. Many many Americans are ignorant when it comes to what is being done in their name and it is not their fault. They seldom hear anything but Israeli propaganda in the news, from their politicians or even from their pulpits. How else could they form another opinion, unless they are willing to read. 

I don’t even like myself for not standing up more to “Free Palestine and End the Occupation” for fear that it might cost me friendships or bring criticism from my neighbors. I want to be liked, so I, too often, hold my tongue, which allows others to assume that I agree with them when they make asinine statements like, “Israel has a right to defend itself,” or “It’s our duty to support the only democracy in the Middle East.”

Do I not like Jews?  I hate the betrayal of the moral ethics I have learned from the teachings of Jesus and the Jewish Prophets. I dislike myself for allowing propaganda to thrive unchallenged all around me.  Yes son, there is a lot to dislike. And as long as the truth is distorted and people are treated with cruelty, I invite you to join me in the things I do not like.

                                                                                                Thomas Are

                                                                                                May 27, 2013

Obama in Israel

Someone, in fact several people, asked for my take on Obama’s visit and speech in Israel.  I am terribly flattered as though what I thought might make any difference.

Some have contacted me expressing disappointment and even anger that Obama was not stronger in condemning Israel for its brutal treatment of the Palestinians.   I have read that some Palestinians were feeling betrayed by the American president.   I understand their anger. However, but for what it’s worth:

I read (not heard) Obama’s speech to the students in Jerusalem and I am not that upset by it. Like those who are angry, it galls me that he referred to “the courage of the Israeli Defense Force,” without any reference to its brutal bombardment of its unarmed neighbors such as Lebanon in ’82,  and Gaza in ‘08-09 and again in 2012, killing hundreds of civilians.  Knowing that history, how can he say, “In Israel we see values that we share.”  He brought up rockets in Sderot, without a hint of the multiple murders of women and children in Gaza that triggered those rockets, as “Israel’s right to defend itself.” He called Menachem Begin, one of the world’s worst terrorist, “a brave leader” of Israel. He must have forgotten Begin’s Irgun days when he blew up the King David Hotel, executed British soldiers and massacred at least a hundred unarmed citizens in Deir Yassin.  Nor in any way did Obama hold Begin accountable for the thousands, mostly women and children, killed during the 1982 invasion of Lebanon.

Our president referred to a two state solution without any reference to the almost 600,000 settlers who continue to steal land and water from Palestinian families. He ignored the construction of the apartheid wall as well as praised Israel’s military disengagement from Gaza as if it had been a disengagement. It’s not “disengagement” when you continue to control the imports of food, medicine and fuel, and shoot fishermen seeking to survive in their own waters.

I agree that Obama ignored Israel’s abysmal behavior and record of human rights violations.

At the same time, the word “Palestine” has seldom passed the lips of any U.S. president, politician, preacher  or broadcaster for the past 64 years. Obama obviously knew, since his Cairo speech, that anything he said on this issue would be repeated over and over.  Yet, he still put the Palestinians on the table. 

 

But the Palestinian people’s right to self-determination and justice must also be recognized. Put yourself in their shoes – look at the world through their eyes. It is not fair that a Palestinian child cannot grow up in a state of her own, and lives with the presence of a foreign army that controls the movements of her parents every single day. It is not just when settler violence against Palestinians goes unpunished. It is not right to prevent Palestinians from farming their lands; to restrict a student’s ability to move around the West Bank; or to displace Palestinian families from their home. Neither occupation nor expulsion is the answer. Just as Israelis built a state in their homeland, Palestinians have a right to be a free people in their own land.

Then, maybe in the best part of his speech, he paints Arabs, especially Palestinians, as “no different” than the kids to whom he was speaking:

Four years ago, I stood in Cairo in front of an audience of young people. Politically, religiously, they must seem a world away. But the things they want – they’re not so different from you. The ability to make their own decisions; to get an education and a good job; to worship God in their own way; to get married and have a family. The same is true of the young Palestinians that I met in Ramallah this morning, and of young Palestinians who yearn for a better life in Gaza.

He used the term, “occupation,” and spoke of “justice for Palestinians.” Will his saying these things make any difference? Probably not to the governments of the U.S. or Israel.  But maybe, just maybe, his recognition of a Palestinian people who  have hopes and dreams just like those to whom he was speaking may touch the conscience of those young people.   I don’t think he was talking to Netanyahu or the U.S. Congress. He was talking to the future Israel which will be one state made up of Israelis and Palestinians.  Those kids will have to decide whether it will be an apartheid state of violent oppressors or a democratic nation for all its citizens.

He challenged those 2000 students in Israel, and he did so, in spite of the attacks he will receive from the big four: Netanyahu, the Republicans, the Christian fundamentalists and the lobby, none of which express any caring for the Palestinians. The reality of the Israeli/Palestinian situation has been deliberately hidden from the American people. At least, Obama put it on the table.

Now, it’s up to the rest of us, ordinary people like you and me, to keep it there.

Thomas Are

March 30, 2013

Just Another Leak in the Dam

JUST ANOTHER LEAK IN THE DAM

Wow! There is a leak in the dam and the alarm bell is ringing.  Something is happening.

FIRST – In spite of the all out effort of the United Sates to block the Palestinians from being recognized as an observer state, the United Nations, with the support of 138 nations, voted for it. Among other things, this means Israel may soon face the International Criminal Court which has already declared Israel’s settlements a violation of article 49 of the Fourth Geneva convention which:

Prohibits the transfer of civilian populations to occupied territory.  It says the settlements are “leading to a creeping annexation that prevents the establishment of a contiguous and viable state and undermines the right of the Palestinian people to self determination.

Unity Dow, one of the UNHRC judges said:

The magnitude of violations relating to Israel’s policies of dispossession, evictions, demolitions and displacements from land shows the widespread nature of these breaches of human rights … The motivation behind violence and intimidation against the Palestinians and their property is to drive the local populations away from their lands, allowing the settlements to expand.[1]

Of course, the US attitude and Israel’s response is that such statements are “biased” and “counterproductive.”  If you agree with those who believe that Israel has unquestionable rights to steal Palestinian land and oppress millions of people and that Palestinians have no right to resist, then you will remain silent. However, you must be aware that most of the world considers America’s attempts to shield Israel’s actions criminal. When it comes to Palestine, most world leaders say that we are not just supporting the wrong side, we are the wrong side.

The alarm bells are ringing. Israel did not have its way before the United Nations. That is not all.

THEN - Chuck Hagel was confirmed.  The very idea that anyone not “lobby certified” could actually become a member of Presidents Obama’s cabinet rings alarm bells in Israel’s Zionist halls. Never mind that Hagel earned two purple hearts, and a medal for valor fighting for the US in Viet Nam, he failed to pass the muster with Israel-firsters in congress.  He is perfectly qualified to defend America, but he failed to commit to Israel’s issues, including no reduction of money for Israel’s military even as our own military budget is being cut, or to declare war with Iran if Israel feels threatened.  According to Philip Weiss, “It was alright for Hagel to criticize the U.S., but not alright to criticize Israel.”[2]  When Hagel suggested that the Jewish lobby intimidates people on capital hill and gets Congress to do “dumb stuff,” he was attacked by Lindsey Graham, “Name one dumb thing Congress did because of pressure.”  Hagel folded in hopes of gaining confirmation.  But, I can name some dumb things: supporting settlements, building an apartheid wall in the West Bank, and cutting off electricity, fuel and water to the people of Gaza, assassinating leaders who reach out for peace and killing hundreds of innocent women and children. I don’t know what Graham calls those kinds of actions but I call it “dumb stuff.”   And the hearing itself was evidence of intimidation by the Jewish lobby.  Yet in spite of Israel jerking the chain of so many people in Congress, Hagel was confirmed even after having declared, “I am a United States Senator. My oath is to the Constitution of the United States, not to Israel.” One more leak in Israel’s propaganda dam. 

THIRD - For years, Israel has dominated the film industry in showing movies telling of Israeli courage and the miracle of 1948 just the way Israel wants the American public to believe it happened. Classic among these is the movie, Exodus based on Leon Uris’ book by that same name.  It is still on the market.  Anyone can go into a leading bookstore and ask for it.  “Of course, we have it.” The clerk will say, "The fiction department is right over here.”

Then, two of the five documentaries nominated for the 2012 Oscar Awards focused on Israel’s treatment of the Palestinians.

The nonfiction film, 5 Broken Cameras shows Israel’s failed effort to squelch the spirits of those demonstrating against having their lands taken in the name of Israeli security.  The title “5 Broken Cameras” comes from the fact that five cameras were destroyed by Israeli bullets and the film’s producer, Emad Burnat, was wounded by soldiers while trying to film what was going on. Why such a violent reaction?  It could be that Israel is ashamed and fears for anyone on the outside to know?  “Burnat photographed settlers burning and uprooting ancient olive trees, and Israeli troops injuring protesters with tear gas canisters and rubber bullets.[3]

Mr. Burnat and his wife were hours late for the banquet given in his  honor. They had been arrested at the Los Angeles Airport because he could not prove that he had an invitation to the Oscar presentations. Only after Michael Moore learned of his arrest and intervened was Burnat released.     

Then, “We are making the lives of millions unbearable, into prolonged human suffering, and it’s killing me.” And, “We’ve become a brutal occupation force similar to the Germans in World War II.”  These are not the words of a group of Israeli peace activist or left wingers in Israel. These are quotes form two of the most respected leaders in Israel, former heads of Shim Bet, (Israel’s version of the F.B.I.)

Yesterday, I saw The Gatekeepers, the second documentary nominated for an Oscar by the Academy Awards. In this film, six former heads of Shin Bet express their opinions on such things as Israeli and Palestinian terrorism, torture, the morality of targeted assassinations with uncontrolled “collateral damage” which means the killing of innocent by-standers.  I was amazed to hear Israeli “strongmen", calling for more dialogue and less violence.  Referring to a violent scene, one said, “These moments end up etched inside you, and when you retire, you become a bit of a leftist.”

The Gatekeepers film director, Dror Moreh, presents a bleak view, “I am now worried about what is happening in Israel...Nothing good will come to the State of Israel by continuing this conflict.”[4]  As I sat through this film, I was stunned and disappointed. I felt admiration for those who used to represent power as they re-evaluated their actions, denounce the occupation and now sound like normal sensitive human beings.  I was disappointed that it took them so long.

All across Netanyahu’s government alarm bells are ringing. Of course, all across America there are politicians and media pundits who are still trying to un-ring that bell.  But word is leaking out. Israel is not the victim.  

Not one Israeli was killed in 2012 by Palestinians. Meanwhile, in the first 13 days of this year, Jewish settlers and IDF soldiers shot dead at least five young unarmed Palestinians.

Over the past decades Israel  has not hesitated to use violence on the unfortunate Palestinians --- arresting, torturing and killing them in large numbers, seizing and settling their land, demolishing their houses, stealing their water, and subjecting them to innumerable humiliations and human rights abuses.[5] Israel has rejected many opportunities for peace because each one required the stopping of settlements and recognizing the rights of Palestine to exist in its own land. 

Thomas Are

March 26, 2013

---

[1] John Glasser, UN Report: Israel Must Withdraw All Settlements or Face ICC. , Anti-War.com,

 January 31, 2013.

[2] Philip Weiss,  Hagel Offers himself as Secretary of Israel’s defense.   January 31, 2013

[3] Pat and Samir Twair,  Two Palestinian, Israeli Documentaries Depict Evils of Military Occupation.,  Washington Report on Middle  East Affairs,  April, 2013. p.50

[4] Interview with New York Film Festival Director Richard Peria, October 17, 2012.

[5] Patrick Seale, Obama’s Appointment with History., Washington Report on Middle  East Affairs,  April, 2013. p.12